



.-J^' . 







\.^*' 



'O, *-V.s^ .'V 



.^ 0-.0 '*'_ •• .0> .,. ^<6 ""' .^" .-„ ^'?'„"-*'' 4>" 






^-j*^ /.^•y7^v: 




















> 












Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2010 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/fortpittOOdahl 



FORT PITT 

BY 

CHARLES W. DAHLINGER 



PRIVATELY PRINTED 

PITTSBURGH, 

1922 



FORT PITT 

BY y 

CHARLES Wr DAHLINGER 



PRIVATELY PRINTED 

PITTSBURGH, 

1922 






GIFT 



NOV 



23 '27 



INTRODUCTORY 



The following account of Pittsburgh while it 
was still generally known by the name of 
Fort Pitt, was originally published in the 
Western Pennsylvania Historical Magazine 
for January and April, 1922. The story is 
now reprinted separately in order that it may 
be preserved in a more convenient form than 
if scattered through the pages of a serial 
publication. 



CONTENTS 

Page 
Chapter I 

The Struggle For Supremacy Between France and England 1 

Chapter II 

The Collapse of French Rule in America, and the Rise of 
English Power in the Ohio Valley 11 

Chapter III 

The Town Grows as the Fort Declines 21 

Chapter IV 

In Virginia 31 

Chapter V 

Under the Continental Congress 45 

Chapter VI 

Last Days of Fort Pitt 57 

Chapter VII 

The Old Redoubt, 

I Location and Date qf Erection 66 

II In Later Days 76 




William Pitt 



FORT PITT 

By 

CHARLES W. DAHLINGER. 

CHAPTER I. 

The Struggle For Supremacy Between France and England 



In the olden time Pittsburgh was known indiscrim- 
inately as Pittsburgh and Fort Pitt, the latter designation 
being most generally used. The story of those far-away 
days has been told before, but as Sir Charles Wakefield of 
England is about to present to the city, a bust of William 
Pitt, first Earl of Chatham, for whom the place was named, 
it will not be inappropriate to repeat the tale, together 
with such incidents as may have been overlooked, or which 
did not come to the knowledge of the earlier historians. 
The story of the struggle for supremacy in America be- 
tween the French and the English is of romantic interest. 
The French claimed the interior of the continent by right 
of discovery by LaSalle, The English claims were more 
comprehensive and just as inconclusive as those of the 
French. They claimed the country from the Atlantic 
Ocean to the Pacific on the ground of discovery, and the Ohio 
Valley by purchase at Lancaster in 1744 from the Six 
Nations, the ostensible owners. (1) The contest on the 
part of the French was hopeless from the beginning. Their 
settlements were widely scattered. Canada and Acadia, which 
last, had been ceded to England in 1713, were in the far 
north, while away to the south was Louisiana. The total 
population was only about eighty thousand, while the Eng- 
lish Colonies, which were all closely connected and located 
on the Atlantic seaboard, numbered about one million one 
hundred and sixty thousand souls. (2) The French de- 
veloped a comprehensive plan of building a line of forts 
from Canada southward, intended ultimately to connect 
Canada with Louisiana, and restrict the English to the sea- 
board. 



2 Fort Pitt 

Like that of most frontier communities, the story of 
Fort Pitt and of the village which sprang up within its 
shadow, is so intermingled, that in order to arrive at an in- 
telligent understanding, the incidents connected with each 
must be treated as the history of the whole. The annals 
of Fort Pitt begin many years prior to its actual erection. 

It was the desire for the possession of the Indian trade 
that first stirred the rival claimants to the Ohio Valley into 
action. It was a great fur country and was capable of 
drawing rich tributary currents from the region of the 
Great Lakes. (3) English traders were doing business 
there as early as 1730, French traders even earlier. At first 
the French had a monopoly of the fur trade, but the prices 
of furs declined and the Indians were dissatisfied and in 
1747 they turned to the English traders who paid them 
more money for their furs. Conrad Weiser, a German, who 
had been a farmer and school teacher, (4) and in early life 
had lived with the Indians, spoke their language 
and had their confidence, was now the Pennsyl- 
vania Indian interpreter and the confidential adviser to 
the authorities in Indian affairs. He early learned of 
the discontent of the Indians with the French traders and 
saw an opportunity for enlarging the trade and influence 
of Pennsylvania, which information he imparted to the 
Provincial authorities. Accordingly in 1748 he was sent 
with presents to the Indians at Logstown, situated on the 
north side of the Ohio River, eighteen miles below the site 
of Pittsburgh, where he made a treaty and secured their 
friendship for Pennsylvania. At the same time he gained 
for the Province the Indian trade from Logstown to the 
Mississippi River, and from the OMo to thel Michigan 
region. (5) 

Virginia was also anxious for the Ohio Indian trade, 
and in 1748 there was formed by London merchants and a 
few leading men in Virginia, including Thomas Lee the Presi- 
dent of the Council of the Colony, and two brothers of George 
Washington, the Ohio Company, to trade with the Indians 
and settle on their lands, Governor Dinwiddle becoming a 
partner at a later date. They obtained a grant from Eng- 
land of 500,000 acres of land on the south side of the Ohio 
River and sent Christopher Gist, a surveyor, into the coun- 



Fort Pitt 3 

try to explore and report on the same, his first journey being 
undertaken in 1751, and the other in 1752. On the second 
visit to the Indians Gist made a treaty with them at Logs- 
town, where he secured their promise not to molest the 
company in its settlement of the lands. (6) The next year 
the Ohio Company made plans for building a fort and laying 
out a town on the hill immediately below the mouth of 
Chartiers Creek. (7) 

The French were not asleep while Weiser was weaning 
the Indians from their cause, and during the time that the 
Ohio Company was negotiating with them for permission to 
occupy their lands, but were preparing to assert their 
claims to the Ohio Country by some positive act. Accord- 
ingly, in 1749, they sent an expedition down the Allegheny 
and Ohio rivers, under Captain de Celeron and took posses- 
sion of the Ohio Valley in the name of the French king. 
The French carried the sword of conquest in one hand and 
the cross of salvation in the other; and the occupation of 
the Ohio country was both spiritual and political. The 
wooden crosses which DeCeleron erected along the Ohio 
River were intended to indicate that the country was dedi- 
cated to the Christian religion; the sovereignty of France 
was proclaimed by the burial of leaden plates reciting the 
story of the occupation. Priests and soldiers chanted the 
Te Deum, the hills and valleys rang with the cries of Vive 
Le Roi, and the country was part of New France. 

The English soon learned of DeCeleron's expedition, 
but took no decisive measure to gain possession of the Ohio 
Valley until 1754. Two years (8) before the French 
had begun building their series of forts southward 
and were contemplating the erection of a fort at 
the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela 
rivers. Pennsylvania knew of this action of the French 
but did nothing to thwart them, although three of 
the forts already constructed were within the limits of 
that Province. Governor Dinwiddle of Virginia was not so 
quiescent, being perhaps also influenced by his connection 
with the Ohio Company. First he sent George Washington, 
then twenty-one years of age, to interview the command- 
ants of the French forts and ascertain their reasons for 



4 Fort Pitt 

building the forts, but their only reply was that, "France was 
resolved on possessing the great territory which her mis- 
sionaries and travellers had revealed to the world." (9) 
In the spring Dinwiddle, with the consent of Governor 
Hamilton of Pennsylvania, (10) sent a small force, hastily 
collected, to the confluence of the Allegheny and Ohio rivers 
where they began the erection of a fort in an effort to 
forestall the French, the place having been recommended by 
Washington as the most suitable for the purpose. This the 
Virginians called Fort Prince George (11) after the grand- 
son of George the Second, king of England, the heir ap- 
parent to the throne and afterward King George the Third. 
Virginia also decided to raise a regiment of six companies, 
and in order to stimulate the military ardor of the people. 
Governor Dinwiddle issued a proclamation offering a bounty 
of two hundred thousand acres of land on the Ohio River, 
to be divided among those who would enlist for the pro- 
posed expedition. (12) 

But the French were equally alert and by a movement 
from Canada which was Napoleonic in its rapidity (13) 
they appeared on April 17, 1754, in overwhelming force 
before the Virginians and compelled Ensign Ward, the 
officer in charge of the uncompleted works, to surrender, 
and themselves built a fort, which they named Fort Du- 
quesne after the Marquis, Duquesne deMenneville, Gov- 
ernor-General of Canada. The next year the French an- 
nihilated the army of English and Provincials under Brad- 
dock, which had been sent to capture Fort Duquesne. 

Then came a change in the English policy. The nation 
was disheartened at the failure of its armies in Europe and 
America, and in 1757 with one voice called William Pitt, 
to form a ministry in which he became nominally Secretary 
of State but in reality Prime Minister, the Premier, the 
Duke of New Castle, being a figurehead. Pitt was a man of 
unbounded energy and immediately upon assuming power 
planned for the next year a vigorous prosecution of the war 
against the French whom the English had been fighting in 
Europe for several years. For America he designed three 
campaigns — one against Ticonderoga and Crown Point, an- 
other against Louisburg and the third against Fort Du- 




Marquis Duquesne de Menneville. 



Fort Pitt 5 

quesne, the last to be commanded by General John Forbes. 

The fame of William Pitt spread to America and the 
Colonials were aroused as they had never been aroused be- 
fore; and they became enthusiastic partisans of the war. 
The Pennsylvania Assembly at once provided men, voted 
money, supplied wagons and repaired roads. In Phila- 
delphia the Rev. Dr. William Smith, Provost of the College 
and Academy of Philadelphia, now the University of Penn- 
sylvania, renowned in his day as an orator and writer, advo- 
cated participation in the war from the pulpit, and with his 
pen. (14) The prevalent opinion among the Americans 
was that they were engaged in a religious war. The French 
were Catholics and the English Protestants, and therefore 
it was a struggle between the two religions. Dr. Smith 
advocated this view. In an address written, and published 
broadcast, at the desire of General Forbes while levying 
forces for the contemplated expedition against Fort Du- 
quesne, he declared: "Never was the Protestant cause in 
a more desperate situation." Probably for the benefit of 
the many German settlers in Pennsylvania he lauded Fred- 
erick II, the Protestant king of Prussia, designated in his- 
tory as Frederick the Great, who was dazzling Eng- 
land and the rest of Europe by his audacious victories over 
several Catholic powers, and proclaimed him "The great and 
heroic King of Prussia." Dr. Smith's conclusion was an 
appeal to the patriotism of the Americans. "Rise then, my 
countrymen! as you value the blessings of the liberty you 
enjoy, and dread the evils that hang over you, rise and show 
yourselves worthy of the name of Britons !" 

Pennsylvania responded nobly to the appeal, and sup- 
plied nearly half the required force, not including wag- 
goners and laborers. Colonel Henry Bouquet, a brilliant 
Swiss officer, and lieutenant-colonel of the First Battalion 
of the 60th or Royal American Regiment, was the second 
in command to Forbes. The campaign was opened in the 
spring by Colonel Bouquet setting out with the regulars on 
his march to Raystown which he reached early in June. 
The Virginia, Maryland and North Carolina troops were 
assembled at Winchester under Washington. Forbes 
marched from Philadelphia early in July. The cam- 
paign proceeded without mishap until September 14th when 



6 Fort Pitt 

the army met with a serious setback at the very gate of 
Fort Duquesne, where Major James Grant was defeated 
and taken prisoner. 

Emboldened by this victory the French with a large 
force of Indians determined to attack Bouquet at his camp 
on Loyalhanna Creek on October 12th, before the arrival 
of the force under General Forbes, but were defeated with 
considerable loss. The march was resumed. The weather 
turned cold and the mountains were white with snow; then 
the snow melted and the cold rains fell and the new road 
which had just been constructed became deep with mud. 
But the march continued. On November 24th the army 
was on the bank of Turtle Creek, within twelve miles of 
Fort Duquesne. In the evening the Indians reported seeing 
thick clouds of smoke rising over the fort; at midnight the 
dull sound of a distant explosion was heard. In the morn- 
ing the army moved forward again and in the evening 
came in sight of the smoking ruins of the fort, and not a 
Frenchman to be seen. The goal was reached and the cam- 
paign ended. In thankfulness to the great minister who 
had sent him there, Forbes named the ruins, "Pittsburgh". 

The next day was Sunday and by direction of General 
Forbes the Rev. Charles Beatty, the chaplain of Colonel 
William Chapham's Pennsylvania Regiment, was ordered to 
preach "a thanksgiving sermon for the remarkable superi- 
ority of his Majesty's arms." (15) On the same day 
Forbes wrote to Lieutenant-Governor Denny of Pennsyl- 
vania, reporting the capture of Fort Duquesne, the letter 
being dated "Fort Duquesne or now Pittsburgh," (16) this 
being the first time of which there is any record that the 
name "Pittsburgh" was used. On the 27th Forbes notified 
William Pitt of the victory over the French, this letter being 
dated simply "Pittsburgh." He also gave Pitt this addi- 
tional information: "I have used the freedom of giving 
your name to Fort DuQuesne, as I hope it was in some 
measure the being actuated by your spirits that now makes 
us masters of the place." (17) 

A flood of other letters must have been sent by the 
happy captors of the French stronghold describing the ex- 
pedition, and telling of the taking of the fort and expressing 
the exhuberance of their joy over the event. Only a few, 



Fort Pitt ? 

however, have been preserved, and these are mainly from 
officers of the expedition. Among those still in existence 
are two letters from Colonel Bouquet. To his friend, William 
Allen, the Chief Justice of Pennsylvania, he wrote on No- 
vember 25, 1758, the letter being dated at "Fort Duquesne" 
in which he told of the last days of the campaign, and (18) 
generously gave Forbes the credit for its happy ending. 
"After God," he said, "the success of the expedition is en- 
tirely due to the General." 

The other letter written by Bouquet is the one he sent 
his friend, Miss Anne Willing of Philadelphia, whose cousin, 
Joseph Shippen, was in his command and was his intimate 
friend. This also was dated at Fort Duquesne on November 
25th. He addressed his correspondent as "Dear Nancy." 
She has been described as a charming young lady to whom 
Bouquet was engaged to be married. "I have the satisfaction 
to give you the agreeable news of the conquest of this terrible 
Fort," he began. "The French seized with a panic at our 
approach have destroyed themselves — the nest of pirates 
which has so long harboured the murderers and destructors 
of our poor people. 

"They have burned and destroyed to the ground their 
fortifications, houses and magazines, and left us no other 
cover than heaven — a very cold one for an army without 
tents or equipages. We bear all this hardship with alacrity 
by the consideration of the immense advantage of this 
important acquisition." He concluded by telling her that 
he hoped soon to have the pleasure of seeing her when he 
would give her "a more particular account — chiefly about 
the beauty of this situation, which appears to me beyond 
my description." (19) 

Another letter of importance is that of George 
Washington, who wrote to Governor Farqieur of Virginia 
on November 28, 1758, from the "Camp at Fort Duquesne" : 

"I have the pleasure to inform you that Fort Duquesne, 
or rather the ground upon which it stood, was possessed by 
his Majesty's troops on the 25th inst. The enemy, after 
letting us get within a day's march of the place, burned 
the fort, and ran away by the light of it, going down the 
Ohio by water, to the number of about five hundred men, 
according to our best information. The possession of the 



g Port Pitt 

fort has been a matter of surprise to the whole army, and 
we cannot attribute it to more probable causes than the 
weakness of the enemy, want of provisions, and the defec- 
tion of the Indians. Of these circumstances we were luckily 
informed by those prisoners, who providentially fell into 
our hands at Loyalhanna, when we despaired of proceeding 
farther. A council of war had determined that it was not 
advisable to advance this season beyond the place; but the 
above information caused us to march on without tents or 
baggage, and with only a light train of artillery." (20) 

Forbes left the junction of the two rivers on December 
3rd with the bulk of the army, (21) Bouquet remaining with 
the residue. The next day as Forbes' representative he 
met the Indians and gave them Forbes' assurance that the 
intentions of the British toward them were peaceful. (22) 
On December 5th Bouquet followed Forbes (23) with nearly 
all the remaining troops leaving Colonel Hugh Mercer in 
command with a force of two hundred and eighty men. (24) 

In the meantime Forbes was marching eastward, 
but at Ligonier he became ill, and was obliged to 
remain there until December 27th, when he continued his 
journey, reaching Philadelphia on January 17, 1759. Not- 
withstanding his continued illness, one of his first acts 
after his arrival in Philadelphia, was to cause to be struck 
a gold medal in commemoration of the campaign which 
had ended so gloriously. On one side was a repre- 
sentation of a road cut through a forest and over 
rocks and mountains, together with the motto. Per tot 
Discrimina. On the reverse side was a picture of the con- 
fluence of the Ohio and Monongahela rivers, with a fort 
in flames, and Forbes approaching, carried on a litter, fol- 
lowed by the army marching in column with cannon; the 
motto here was Ohio Brittanick Concilio Manuque. 
On February 20th Forbes distributed the medals, (25) 
which were to be worn around the neck attached to a dark 
blue ribbon, to the officers of Colonel Bouquet's battalion 
of the 60th or Royal American Regiment. 

On March 11th, the conqueror of Fort Duquesne died 
in Philadelphia. The entire city mourned his death and two 
days later he was given an imposing funeral. The remains 
were taken to the State House, and from there, escorted 




be- 



» 



Fort Pitt 9 

by a large force of military and by the officers of the 
Province and of the city, were taken to Christ Church, 
thousands of spectators lining the streets as the funeral 
cortege passed by. In the chancel of the church the Iron 
Head, as his Indian allies admiringly called Forbes, was 
laid to rest. (26) 

Winter was coming on at the junction of the Monon- 
gahela and Allegheny rivers, and in order to provide shelter 
as well as to afford protection for the troops, it was neces- 
sary to build a temporary works, and the construction of a 
small stockade was begun before Forbes left. It was located 
on the bank of the Monongahela River at the south end of 
West Street, and between that street and what was for 
many years known as Liberty Street, but is now Lib- 
erty Avenue, and within four hundred yards of Fort Du- 
quesne. It was four-sided with bastions at the four corners. 
According to the plan in the Crown Collection of Maps and 
Manuscripts in the British Museum it was of sufficient size 
for the accommodation of two hundred and twenty men. (27) 

The importance of the place as a barrier against the 
encroachments of the French, in the eyes of the English 
ministry, is apparent from the letter of William Pitt, dated 
January 23, 1759, and written immediately upon receiving 
news of the capture of Fort Duquesne. Already he 
advocated the restoration, if possible of Fort Duquesne, or 
the erection of a fortress adequate to maintaining the pos- 
sessions of English. (28) 

REFERENCES. ' 

1. William L. Stone. The Life and Times of Sir William Johnson, 
Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. I, pp. 436-437. 

2. Walford Davis Green, M. P. William Pitt, Earl of Chatham, 
New York, 1901, p. 66. 

3. Joseph S. Walton. Conrad Weiser And The Indian Policy Of 
Colonial Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, p. 178. 

4. Lucy Forney Bittinger. The Germans In Colonial Times, Phil- 
adelphia, 1901, p. 188. 

5. Joseph S. Walton. Supra, p. 193. 

6. Early History of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, app. 
p. 4-5. 

7. William M. Darlington. Christopher Gist's Journals, Pittsburgh, 
1893, pp. 236-237. 

8. William L. Stone. Supra, p. 440. 

9. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
Boston, 1879, Vol. Ill, p. 71. 

10. Neville B. Craig. Lecture Upon The Controversy Between Penn- 
sylvania And Virginia, Pittsburgh, 1845, pp. 6-7. 



10 Fort Pitt 

11. The Official Records Of Robert Dinwiddie, Lieutenant-Governor 
Of The Colony Of Virginia, 1751-1758, Richmond, Virginia. 
MDCCCLXXXIII,Vol. I, p. 323. 

12. William L. Stone, Supra, p. 446-447. 

13. George Bancroft, Supra, p. 75. 

14. William Smith, D.D. Discourses On Public Occasions in America 
London, 1762, Appendix pp. 2-31. 

15. William M. Darlington. In Centennial Memorial Of The Plant- 
ing and Growth Of Presbyterianism In Western Pennsylvania 
And Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 265. 

The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, pp. 184-185. 

16. Colonial Records. Vol. VIII, pp. 232-234. 

17. Gertrude Selwyn Kimball. Correspondence Of William Pitt, 
New York, 1906, p. 409. 

18. The Olden rime.__Supra, pp. 182-184. 

19. George Harrison Fisher. Brigadier General Henry Bouquet, 
InThe Pennsylvania Magazine Of History and Biography, Phil- 
adelphia, 1879, Vol. Ill, pp. 121-143. 

20. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Supra, App. pp. 302-303 

21. Ibid, p. 122. 

22. Ibid, pp. 127-128. 

23. Ibid, p. 123. 

24. Colonial Records, Supra, p. 292. 

25. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace. A Regimental Chronicle And List 
Of Officers Of The 60th Or Kings Royal Rifle Corps, London, 
1879, p. 44. 

William M. Darlington. Supra, pp. 265-266. 

26. J. Thomas Scharf and Thompson Westcott. History of Philad- 
elphia, Philadelphia, 1884, Vol. I, p. 254. 

27. Archer Butler Hulbert. The Crown Collection Of Photographs 
Of American Maps, Cleveland, Ohio, 1905, Vol. II, No. 23. 

28. Colonial Records, Supra, p. 315. 



Fort Pitt 11 



CHAPTER II. 

The Collapse of French Rule in America, and the Rise of 

English Power in the Ohio Valley. 



Forbes had been succeeded in the command of the 
English and Provincial troops in the Southern Department 
to which Pennsylvania belonged, by General John Stan- 
wix (1) and Captain Harry Gordon who ranked as lieuten- 
ant in the First Battalion of the 60th or Royal American 
Regiment, (2) was designated as chief engineer of the 
proposed fort. On August 6, 1759, Colonel Mercer wrote 
to Governor Denny that Captain Gordon had arrived with 
most of the artificers, but would not select a site for the 
new fort until the arrival of General Stanwix, and added, 
"We are preparing the materials for building with what 
expedition so few men are capable of." (3) Shortly 
afterward Stanwix arrived bringing with him ma- 
terials and more skilled men and laborers, and on September 
3, 1759, the work of building the fortress, advocated by 
Pitt, was commenced. 

The plan of the fort, however, was not the work of Cap- 
tain Gordon, but was made by Lieutenant Bernard Ratzer, an 
assistant engineer, also belonging to the First Battalion 
of the 60th or Royal American Regiment. (14) The orig- 
inal of this plan, like the plan of the temporary fort built 
along the Monongahela River, is preserved in the Crown 
Collection of Maps and Manuscripts in the British Museum. 
The 60th or Royal American Regiment, originally the 62nd 
or Royal American Regiment of Foot, had been authorized 
by an act of Parliament of November 5, 1755, which pro- 
vided for raising a regiment among the German and Swiss 
settlers in America, and for the granting of commissions in 
this regiment to foreign Protestants who had served abroad 
as officers or engineers. The number of officers was 
never to exceed fifty and the engineers never to be more 
than twenty, and none were to be allowed to rise above the 
rank of lieutenant-colonel. (5) One of the requirements 
of the officers was that they must be able to speak the 
German language. Judging from Ratzer's name and because 
it appears in the list of officers of the battalion with nearly 



12 Fort Pitt 

a score of other lieutenants with German names, all of 
whom were commissioned at about the same time as Rat- 
zer, he was a German. That he was a man of 
ability is apparent from the fact that in 1766 and 1767 he 
made a survey of the city of New York and a plan of the 
place, of which several editions were published. This plan, 
according to an eminent authority, is "the most accurate 
and reliable survey which we have of New York at this 
period and even today is much used in searching titles." (6) 
Ratzer remained in the English army for many years after 
the close of the French War, advancing to the rank of 
captain in 1773 and major in 1782. (7) 

An interesting account of the happenings at the forks 
of the two rivers at this period was printed in the American 
Magazine of December, 1759, published at Woodbridge, 
New Jersey. (8) It is in the form of a letter, and is dated 
September 24, 1759. "It is now near a month since the 
army has been employed in erecting a most formidable 
fortification; such a one as will to latest posterity secure 
the British empire on the Ohio. There is no need to enum- 
erate the abilities of the chief engineer, nor the spirit shown 
by the troops in executing this important task, the fort will 
soon be a lasting monument to both. Upon the General's 
arrival, about four hundred Indians of different nations 
came to confirm the peace with the English, particularly the 
Tawas and Wyandots, who inhabit about Fort D'Etroit. 
These confessed the errors they had been led into by the 
perfidy of the French ; showed the deepest contrition for their 
past conduct, and promised not only to remain fast friends 
to the English, but to assist us in distressing the common 
enemy whenever we should call on them to do it. And all 
the nations which have been at variance with the English, 
said they would deliver up what prisoners they had in their 
hands to the General, at the grand meeting that is to be 
held in about three weeks. As soon as the Congress was 
ended the head of each nation presented the calumet of 
peace to the General, and showed every other token of sin- 
cerity that could be expected which the surrender of the 
prisoners will confirm. In this as in everything that can 
secure the lasting peace and happiness of these Colonies, the 
General is indefatigable." 



Fort Pitt 13 

On October 25, 1759, General Stanwix held another 
council with the Indians and told them that he insisted on 
their restoring the prisoners who were still in their pos- 
session. He also had Captain Montour, the interpreter, in- 
form them that the city of Quebec had been captured by 
the English, who soon expected to drive the French out of 
America. The Indians then formally buried the hatchet 
and declared themselves fast friends of the English for all 
time. The chronicler of conference adds that "thereupon 
General Stanwix drank to the health of the Indians and the 
meeting dispersed." (9) 

The work of building the fort went on throughout the 
summer and autumn, but was necessarily slow. The 
only material at hand was wood, which could be cut within 
a few hundred feet of the fort. Bricks had to be made, 
and to do this the proper clay must first be secured and 
thereafter kilns constructed for burning the bricks. Every 
other article needed in the construction of the fort was car- 
ried overland on packhorses, a distance of more than three 
hundred miles. It was therefore winter before the fort 
was well under way, and on December 8th, General 
Stanwix wrote to Governor Hamilton from the "Camp at 
Pittsburgh." 

"The works here are near carried on to that degree of 
defence which was at first prepared for this year, so that 
I am now by degrees forming a winter garrison which is 
to consist of three hundred Provincials, one-half of whom 
are Pennsylvanians, the others Virginians, and four hun- 
dred of the First Battalion of the Eoyal American Regi- 
ment, the whole to be under the command of Major Tulli- 
kens when I leave it. These I hope I shall be able to cover 
well under good barracks and feed likewise for six months 
from the first of January, besides artillery, artificers and 
batteau men; Indians, too, must be fed, and they are not 
a few, who come and go and trade here." (10) 

On December 24th, General Stanwix sent another 
letter to Governor Hamilton, this time dated "Pittsburgh," 
in which he wrote that he was making arrangements to 
have more troops at Fort Pitt in the following spring to 
assist in the construction of the fort; and that it could be 
completed during the next summer. (11) 



14 Fort Pitt 

After the fort was occupied, although far from fin- 
ished, on March 21, 1760, General Stanwix left Fort Pitt 
for Philadelphia. On June 29th, General Robert Monc- 
ton, the chief officer of the department to which Fort Pitt 
belonged, called by Bancroft "the brave, open-hearted and 
liberal Moncton," who only the year before had been the 
second in command under Wolfe at the surrender of Que- 
bec, came to the fort. (12) Almost immediately he began 
arranging to send a large force to Presqu' Isle (now Erie) 
to take possession of the upper posts as well as those along 
the frontiers as far as Detroit and Mackinaw ; and on July 
7th, Colonel Bouquet marched with five companies for 
Presqu' Isle, other troops following later. But the march 
was uneventful. The French, in order to reinforce the army 
which was being collected by them to oppose the English 
who were moving against Montreal, had withdrawn their 
forces, and when Bouquet reached Presqu' Isle on July 
17th, he was enabled to take possession without resistance. 
It was at about this time that the first census of Pitts- 
burgh was taken, the work being done hy Colonel James 
Burd who arrived with his regiment of Pennsylvanians on 
July 6th. The enumeration was made on July 21st and it 
was found that the population, exclusive of the soldiers, 
was one hundred forty-nine. (13) 

That the reputation with which Bancroft credits Monc- 
ton, was well deserved is evidenced by the consideration 
which he had for the Indians. Some of the Indian traders 
were unscrupulous in their dealings, and the Indians were 
often imposed upon, and cheated in trading their skins and 
furs for such necessaries as they required. Moncton saw 
the evil and provided a remedy, and established a 
store at Fort Pitt where the Indians could trade without 
fear of being wronged. (14) 

On August 20th, Moncton made a treaty at Fort 
Pitt with the Six Nations and delivered a speech from Sir 
Jeffrey Amherst, the commander in chief of the British 
forces in America. He declared that the King of England 
had not sent him to deprive the Indians of their lands, that 
he did not mean to do so, and that the posts which he was 
establishing were being built to prevent the enemy from 
taking them; nor were the English people there to settle 




Fold-out 
Placeholder 



This foid-out is being digitized, and will be ins 

future date. 



Fort Pitt 15 

on the Indian lands. (15) 

Meanwhile the work on the fort was progressing. In 
the diary of James Kenny, a Quaker, who was living in 
Pittsburgh in 1761, and managing a store (16) for Phila- 
delphia parties, there is an account of the uncompleted fort 
as it appeared in civilian eyes, as well as interesting side- 
lights on the life of the village. In one of the entries dated 
"11th mo., 19th," there is a detailed description of the fort, 
the "banks" of which the writer states are nearly raised. 
He relates that the front facing the town is of brick and 
the corners of the angles of hewn stone ; * * * the part 
nearest the point where the two rivers meet is of earth 
sodded over and covered with thick long grass planted the 
year before, the bank having been mown several times 
during the summer. The fort he said is "four square" 
with a row of barracks along each square, three rows being 
of wooden framework, and the row on the side nearest the 
point, brick. Also that a large brick house had been 
erected during the past summer in the southeast corner of 
the fort on which the roof is being put on. He continues, 
telling that there are steps at the door of hewn 
free stone, and the building has a cellar under it. The doors 
of the magazine, vaults and dungeons, are under huge banks 
of earth thrown out when the trenches were dug, and open 
in the rear of the barracks. In the magazines are kept the 
stores of ammunition, etc., and in the dungeons the pris- 
oners who are to be tried for their lives are confined. There 
are no lights in the vaults and on the southeast bastion 
stands a high pole like a mast, on which a flag is hoisted 
every first day of the week from about eleven to one o'clock, 
and on state days, etc. Then there are three wells of water 
walled in the fort, and there is a square of clear ground 
in the interior about two acres in extent. 

Kenny's journal also gives the earliest information 
obtainable in regard to the state of education and re- 
ligion in Pittsburgh. He states that many of the inhabi- 
tants had engaged a schoolmaster, and had subscribed 
sixty pounds for him for the year, and that he had twenty 
scholars; also that the soberer people seemed to long for 
some public way of worship and that the schoolmaster, 
although a Presbyterian, reads from the book of Common 



16 Fort Pitt 

Prayer, on the first day of the week to a congregation of 
different principals, "where they behave very grave." This 
last remark is evidently not made from personal knowl- 
edge, as the writer adds in parenthesis, "as I heard;" and 
concludes his observations by saying that, "On occasion 
the children also are brought to church as they call it." 

General Moncton had left Fort Pitt on October 27, 
1760, (17) and from that time Colonel Bouquet was in 
charge, and at his direction a second enumeration of the 
inhabitants, as well as of the houses in the town was made. 
This was done on April 14, 1761, and the report showed that 
the population consisted of two hundred and twenty-one 
men, which included a number of soldiers dwelling outside 
of the fort, seventy-three women and thirty-eight children, 
and that there were standing in the village one hundred and 
sixty-two houses, of which ten were unoccupied. (18) 

By the time that winter arrived Colonel Bouquet had 
completed Fort Pitt. It was a most formidable work and 
the cost was enormous. Lewis Brantz, a well educated 
young German, who stopped over in Pittsburgh in 1785, 
while on his way from Baltimore, being employed in con- 
ducting a party of Germans to the Western country, who 
had engaged to settle on lands owned there by his employ- 
ers, wrote in his journal, that Fort Pitt was "formerly the 
strongest Western fortification of the Americans." (19) 
The Rev. David Jones, a Baptist missionary who was in 
Pittsburgh in 1772, related that the fort was said to have 
cost the crown £100,000 sterling. (20) Hugh Henry 
Brackenridge, who came to the place in 1781, writing of the 
fort in 1786, said, the cost was £60,000. (21) 

What is claimed to be an authentic description of the 
fort was printed in the Centennial number of the Pitts- 
burgh Commercial Gazette of July 29, 1886 

"It covered eighteen acres of ground and was much 
larger than Fort Duquesne. The fort proper was built in 
the form of an irregular pentagon, with regular bastions 
at the five angles surrounded by a broad moat, which at 
times was nearly filled by the rising water of the rivers. 
The moat extended from the Allegheny River northeast of 
the fort, and entirely around it, but did not connect with 
the Monongahela, though it approached very near it. The 



Fort Pitt 17 

two shorter angles of the work upon the land side were 
revetted with brick solidly embanked with earth. The 
other three angles were stockaded with an earthen parapet. 
A line of sharpened palisades was planted near the foot of 
the rampart. The fort was supplied with casemates, or 
bomb-proofs, and had barracks and officers quarters for a 
thousand men. Running across a point outside of and 
parallel to the ditch was the glacis, or earth work, 
with salient and re-entrant angles having entrances covered 
by traverses and extending from river to river, A light 
parapet with three bastions, extended along the Allegheny 
and thence along the Monongahela to the bastion. Eigh- 
teen guns were mounted on the bastions." 

The fort was located almost entirely west of Marbury 
(now Barbeau) Street which was laid out partly along what 
had been the glacis and partly in the moat of the fort. (22) 
At about where Penn Street (now Penn Avenue) inter- 
sects Marbury Street was the main entrance to the fort 
and here there was a drawbridge crossing the moat. The 
southerly line of the fort extended across Penn Street, 
this portion of Penn Street being entirely covered by the 
fort all the way to the Monongahela River. It also crossed 
Liberty Street at West Street and extended thence to the 
Monongahela. Facing this stream was another en- 
trance with a drawbridge. The stronghold extended north- 
wardly from Penn Street at the point nearest to Marbury 
Street, about one hundred and fifty feet, and at the north 
bastion about three hundred feet, the distance in both in- 
stances being measured to the outer line of the moat. 

Along the easterly front of the fort Lieutenant Ratzer 
had laid out gardens covering all the ground between the 
Allegheny River and Liberty Street, and extending east- 
wardly approximately to about seventy-five or a hundred 
feet from Fifth (now Stanwix) Street. This ground was 
divided by three lanes into five blocks. The gardens com- 
prised about forty acres and were divided into two parts. 
Close to the fort and extending eastwardly from the bas- 
tions and along the Allegheny River, under the direction 
of the officers of the fort, an orchard of apple and pear 
trees was planted, called the King's Orchard. Farther east 
the ground was brightened with flowers and shrubs ancj 



18 Fort Pitt 

ornamental plants, and made useful by the cultivation of 
vegetables, necessary for the inmates of the fort. This was 
christened the Artillery Gardens. (23) 

But the great fortress erected for the maintenance of 
English supremacy proved to be unnecessary. Long before 
it was completed French arms everywhere in America had 
met with defeat at the hands of the English. The year 
1759 had been a glorious one in English history. The 
French had abandoned Ticonderoga on the approach of 
General Amherst. The battle of Niagara had been fought 
and won on July 24th by Sir William Johnson, the Colonial 
Superintendent of Indian Affairs, the victory being so de- 
cisive that the troops sent by General Stanwix from Fort 
Pitt took possession of the French posts as far as Presqu' 
Isle without resistance. (24) Finally General Wolfe had 
climbed to the plains of Abraham and captured the fortress 
of Quebec, In 1760 these victories were crowned by the 
surrender of Montreal; and Detroit, and all other places in 
Canada were surrendered to General Amherst in Septem- 
ber. The end had come to the French domination. 
All their possessions in the North, as well as those east of 
the Mississippi were in the hands of the victorious English. 
A preliminary treaty of peace between France and Great 
Britain, as well as with other powers, was signed on No- 
vember 3, 1762. But a definitive treaty of peace yet remained 
to be executed, and this was not finally accomplished until 
February 10, 1763, when a treaty was signed at Paris form- 
ally ceding the conquered territories to Great Britain. 

Fort Pitt, however, was still necessary as a protection 
against the Indians. The transfer from the French to the 
English of the posts between the Great Lakes and the Ohio 
led to a war with the Indian tribes of which the master 
spirit was Pontiac, the great chief of the Ottawas. A 
coalition of the Indian tribes from the Allegheny and Ohio 
rivers to the Great Lakes was formed, led by Pontiac, and by 
Kiyasuta at the head of the Senecas, Delawares and Shaw- 
anese. It is generally known as Pontiac's War, but along the 
Ohio border it was called the Kiyasuta and Pontiac 
War. (25) 

The design of the Indians was to drive the English 
from all the Western country. So sudden were the move- 





/O^/^^^^^'^^^^— 



Fort Pitt 19 

ments of the Indians and so vigorous their attacks, that in 
a short time they had captured eight widely scattered forts 
and massacred the garrisons. Only Detroit, Niagara, Fort 
Pitt and Ligonier remained in the hands of the English, and 
these were all besieged. During the latter part of May 
the Indians began murdering settlers in the neighborhood 
of Fort Pitt and even soldiers who tarried outside of the 
fort. On the 30th the matter had become so threatening 
that the inhabitants of the town were ordered into the fort, 
and in the next few days all the houses in the town were 
pulled down or burned. 

Now the siege commenced in earnest. Colonel Bouquet 
then in command at Philadelphia, was early in the spring 
ordered by General Amherst to collect a force and march 
to the relief of Fort Pitt. (26) After being engaged by 
the Indians at Bushy Run, whom he defeated decisively, 
he reached Fort Pitt on August 10th and raised the 
siege. (27) The Indians were dismayed at the terrible 
punishment received at Bushy Run, and not only gave up 
their designs against Fort Pitt, but withdrew westward to 
the Muskingum River. The next spring, hov/ever, having 
recovered from their fright, they again ravaged the fron- 
tier, and a new expedition was planned to be sent against 
their towns on the Muskingum River. 

The army began to assemble at Carlisle on August 5, 
1764, and here Colonel Bouquet assumed the command. The 
arrangements were completed on August 9th, when the new 
army began its march, arriving at Fort Pitt on September 
17th. (28) On October 3rd the army left Fort Pitt and 
arrived at the Muskingum on the 17th, when a conference 
was held with the Indians. The Indians were only too will- 
ing to make peace, the prisoners in their hands were sur- 
rendered, a treaty of peace was entered into, and this ended 
the Kiyasuta and Pontiac War. The termination of this 
war ended the usefulness of Fort Pitt, except as a watch 
tower from which to observe the neighboring Indians, and 
as a place to fit out expeditions against the Indians farther 
away. 

REFERENCES 

1. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
p. 80. 



20 Fort Pitt 

2. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace. A Regimental Chronicle And LAst 
Of Officers Of The 60th Or Kings Royal Rifle Corps, London, 
1879, p. 74. 

3. Colonial Records. Vol. VIII, p. 392. 

4. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra, p. 74. 

Calendar Of New York Colonial Manuscripts, New York, 1643- 
1803, Albany, 1864, p. 501. 

5. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra, p. 1-32. 

6. I. N. Phelps Stokes. The Iconography Of Manhattan Island, 
1498-1909, New York, MDCCCCXV, Vol. I, pp. 342-343. 

7. Nesbit Willoughby Wallace, Supra> pp. 95-106. 

8. Hazard's Register Of Pennsylvania,, Vol. VIII, pp. 136-137. 

9. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, App. 
pp. 139-142. 

10. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. Ill, p. 693. 

11. Ibid, p. 696. 

12. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
Boston, 1879, Vol. Ill, pp. 216-225. 

13. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. VII, p. 422. 

14. Colonial Records, Vol. VIII pp. 646-647, p. 739. 

15. Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 331. 

16. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography, Phil- 
adelphia, 1880, Vol. Ill, pp. 350-351. 

17. Pennsylvania Archives, Second Series, Vol. VII, p. 428. 

18. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, 
Vol. VI, p. 347. 

19. Henry E. Schoolcraft. Information Respecting The History, Con- 
dition And Prosperity Of The Indian Tribes Of The United 
States, Philadelphia, 1853, Part, III, pp. 336-339. 

20. Rev. David Jones. A Journal Of Two Visits Made To Some Na- 
tions Of Indians On The West Side Of The River Ohio, In The 
Years 1772 And 1773, New York, 1865_, p. 20. 

21. H. H. Brackenridge. Gazette Publications, Carlisle, 1806, p. 11. 

22. The Olden Time. Supra 1848, Vol. II, p. 48. 

23. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine's Correspondence, Madi- 
son, Wis., 1882, p. 171. 

H. H. Brackenridge. Supra, p. 12. 

24. George Bancroft. Supra, p. 12 

25. Neville B. Craig. Supra, p. 90. 

A. W. Patterson. History Of The Backwoods, Pittsburgh, 1843, 
p. 128. 

26. The Pennsylvania Magazine Of History And Biography Supra, 
p. 132. 

27. Historical Account Of Bouquet's Expedition Against The Ohio 
Indians, Cincinnati, 0, pp. 16-26. 

28. Ibid, p. 35. 



Fort Pitt 21 



CHAPTER III. 
The Town Grows as the Fort Declines. 



The town, which was located east of the fort, was soon 
rebuilt after the termination of the Kiyasuta and Pontiac 
War and grew in importance. Formerly nearly all the 
houses were located along the Monongahela River, only a 
few near the fort, in what was known as the lower town 
standing away from that river and in the direction of the 
Allegheny. The upper town was farther up the Mononga- 
hela River and extended to the location of Market Street. 
(1) On the rebuilding of the town the houses were mainly 
erected in what had been the upper town, which now began 
near the location of Ferry Street. There were as yet no 
streets, and the only road was the one which came from the 
East, and led to the main entrance of the fort. From this 
a few paths diverged to the Monongahela River and to the 
houses standing there and at the other points. And now, 
in 1765, Colonel John Campbell, by direction of the com- 
mander at Fort Pitt, prepared a plan of that part of the 
territory which lay between Water Street and Second 
Street, now Second Avenue, and Ferry and Market streets, 
comprising four blocks; and this was the town of Pitts- 
burgh. (2) 

More traders settled in the town; the population in- 
creased, trade with the Indians grew in volume, but other- 
wise the only events of moment were the conferences held 
with the Indians who were always willing to attend, know- 
ing that food and drink would be served in abundance, and 
that they would be supplied with such necessaries as am- 
munition and blankets. The most important of these was 
the great conference which began on April 26, 1768, with 
the Six Nations, the Delawares, Shawanese, Munseys, Mohi- 
cans and other tribes (3) who had complained of the mur- 
der of several of their people by the whites, and about their 
encroachments on the Indian lands, particularly on those 
along the Monongahela and Youghiogheny rivers. The In- 
dians attending this conference are said to have numbered 
eleven hundred. (4) 

The title to all the lands in Western Pennsylvania, in- 



22 Fort Pitt 

eluding those about Fort Pitt, was still in the Indians, the 
possession of the numerous occupants being by sufference 
of the proprietaries or by permission of the military author- 
ities. That it was true that the whites were encroaching 
on the Indian lands, and that the Indians had cause for 
their complaints is evident from the fact that the Pennsyl- 
vania Council on February 3, 1768, enacted a law providing 
the death penalty for persons settling on lands owned by 
the Indians. (5) But nothing was done under this law ex- 
cept to issue a proclamation notifying the intruders to 
remove, which they refused to do. The conference con- 
tinued until May 9th, but little was accomplished. It was 
agreed that four deputies from the Indians, accompanied 
by two white men, should go to the illegally settled lands 
and warn the settlers to leave. The Indians, however, re- 
fused to go and the conference ended in failure (6) and the 
irritation between the Indians and the whites continued. 

The desire for the acquisition of the Indian lands in 
the Colonies was not confined to the people of Pennsylvania, 
but was equally strong in New York and Virginia. A set- 
tlement was eventually brought about by leading trading 
companies, assisted by self-interested public men, (7) 
among the latter being William Franklin, the Royal gov- 
ernor of New Jersey, Governor Sir Henry Moore of New 
York, and General Thomas Gage, the commander in chief 
of the British forces in North America, all of whom con- 
nected themselves with a land company formed to acquire 
some of these very lands after the Indians had surrendered 
their title, and expected to profit largely thereby. Sir 
William Johnson is also said to have become interested in 
this company. The matter of the acquisition of the Indian 
lands was brought before the British cabinet, and in Jan- 
uary, 1768, the Earl of Shelburne, the Secretary of State, 
authorized Sir William Johnson to adjust the boundary 
with the Six Nations. Johnson soon arranged for a con- 
gress with the Indians to convene at Fort Stanwix, now 
Rome, New York. On October 24th thirty-two hundred In- 
dians had gathered and with the commissioners of the 
interested Provinces, including Lieutenant Governor Penn 
of Pennsylvania, in attendance, the first session was held. 

Sir William Johnson had the confidence of the Indians 



Fort Pitt 23 

and easily persuaded them to concede the demands of the 
whites, and the sessions ended on November 1st. And for 
a sum of money equal to about ten thousand dollars, and 
such goods as were necessary to the Indians, or for which 
their untutored hearts yearned, they conveyed enormous 
tracts of land to Pennsylvania, Virginia and New York. 
The deed to Pennsylvania was for about one-third of the 
land in the Province, the western portion of the grant, in- 
cluding all the territory south of the Ohio River and east 
of the Allegheny, and comprising the southern portion of 
Allegheny County, all of Washington, Greene, Fayette, 
Westmoreland, Somerset and Cambria counties, and por- 
tions of at least a dozen other counties, extending all the 
way to the northeastern boundary of the state. To Vir- 
ginia the Indians granted a still larger tract, including most 
of the present state of Kentucky, and that to New York 
was also enormous in extent. (8) 

Thomas Penn and Richard Penn, the proprietaries of 
Pennsylvania, were now prepared to place portions of their 
newly acquired lands in the market for sale. All of West- 
ern Pennsylvania was in Cumberland County, and the first 
step taken by the Penns was on March 27, 1769, when they 
caused a survey to be made of a tract of land in that 
county to be called the manor of Pittsburgh, containing 
fifty-seven hundred sixty-six acres, which included Fort 
Pitt and the town of Pittsburgh, and much of the present 
city, as well as a still larger area south of the Monongahela 
River. This was patented on May 19, 1769. 

In June, 1769, panic seized the people of Pittsburgh. 
It was feared that an Indian uprising was imminent. In 
the neighborhood of the town the Senecas had stolen up- 
wards of a hundred and fifty horses, shot about two hun- 
dred head of cattle, and murdered several settlers. The 
prevalent opinion was that the Indian tribes had broken the 
treaty of peace made with them the year before, and the 
farms about the town were soon deserted. The Moravians 
were a sect of German enthusiasts who believed themselves 
called upon to preach the Gospel to the heathen 
nations of all the world, and had penetrated the Western 
wilds and risked torture and death in their efforts to 
Christianize the Indians. The assistance which they rend- 



24 Fort Pitt 

ered the Colonists of the middle Provinces during the 
French War and in the time of Indian troubles, forms an 
illuminating page in Colonial history. Since 1768 they had 
conducted a mission on the upper Allegheny which was in 
charge of David Zeisberger and Gottlieb Senseman. When 
the excitement was at its height at Fort Pitt, the two mis- 
sionaries appeared there for the purpose of obtaining sup- 
plies for their people, and learned of the Indian outrages. 
They knew the sentiments of the Indians toward the whites 
better than the people at the fort and assured them that 
they had nothing to fear as no general uprising of the In- 
dians was contemplated. (9) The help which the Moravi- 
ans gave General Forbes in keeping the Indians from join- 
ing the French in 1758 had been invaluable, and was well 
known at Fort Pitt, where also a number of the Moravians 
had visited and were highly respected, and the assurance 
given by Zeisberger and Senseman stayed the panic and 
calmed the fears of the frontiersman. 

The next year the mission on the Allegheny River was 
removed to Beaver Creek, the congregation leaving on April 
17th in fifteen canoes, reaching Fort Pitt three days later. 
Zeisberger's biographer refers thus to the Indian converts 
and the impression made by them at Fort Pitt: "When this 
post still bore the name of Fort Duquesne, and French 
priests were as active as French soldiers, it had often been 
visited by baptized Indians. But now, for the first time 
appeared a company of Protestant converts. It was a novel 
sight. Traders and the garrison thronged the camp, and 
beheld with astonishment the problem solved, that savages 
can be changed into consistent Christians." (10) 

Ever since the first settlers came into the neighborhood 
of Pittsburgh, there had been scarcely any semblance of 
enforcement of law. Carlisle, the county seat of Cumber- 
land County, was two hundred miles away and when Bed- 
ford County was erected in 1771, there was no relief, 
the county seat of that county being still too distant to 
induce the settlers on the Western border to attempt to 
secure their rights or redress their wrongs by lawful 
methods. They now agitated for a new western county, 
with a centrally located county seat, and on February 26, 
1773, their desires were attained and Westmoreland County 



Fort Pitt 25 

erected, which embraced all of the Province west of "Laurel 
Hill." The county seat was fixed at Hannastown, located 
on the Forbes road about three miles northeast of the pres- 
ent borough of Greensburg, and thirty-five miles from 
Pittsburgh. Three years before its erection as the county 
seat, Robert Hanna had purchased from the Penns the land 
of which Hannastown was part, had built a tavern, laid out 
a village site and thereafter had the place established as 
the county seat. (11) The houses were all built of logs and 
never exceeded thirty in number. 

Few travelers visiting or passing through Pittsburgh 
have left written records of their impressions while there. 
In addition to a few missionaries who were sent out by 
religious organizations in the East to attempt the con- 
version of the Indians, or to preach the Gospel to the set- 
tlers, there was only one lay traveler who wrote out his ex- 
periences while in the place, of which there is in existence 
a published record. Most of the early travelers have left 
only meager details of their visits to "Fort Pitt," for by 
that name they all designated the place. The notes of these 
sojourners in Pittsburgh have an historic interest as they 
indicate the various steps in the progress of the place. But 
the reader cannot help wondering at the unanimity with 
which, where, they refer to the houses at all, they place the 
number so much below the figure given in Colonel Bouquet's 
census of 1761. They were surely not all mistaken in this 
respect, and the only manner in which this can be explained, 
is that when Bouquet gave the number of the houses as 162, 
he meant rooms, the trading houses, which comprised prac- 
tically all of the town, generally having quite a number of 
rooms, and a room being considered sufficient for a family. 

The earliest account is that written by John Heckeweld- 
er, the Moravian missionary, and is the story of a visit made 
by him in 1762. He was then nineteen years of age, and was 
accompanying Christian Frederick Post as assistant, who 
was on a mission to the Moravian Indian towns on the Tus- 
carawas River. On the evening of April 1st, the two trav- 
elers reached Fort Pitt, and Heckewelder relates that when 
within seven or eight miles of the fort, they came upon 
the field of Braddock's defeat. "A dreadful sight was pre- 
sented to our eyes," he writes. "Skulls and bones of the 



26 Fort Pitt 

unfortunate men slain here on the 9th of July, 1755, lay 
scattered all around, and the sound of our horses' hoofs 
continually striking against them, made dismal music, as, 
with the Monongahela full in view, we rode over this memor- 
able battleground." Continuing he said: "The only pri- 
vate dwelling in the neighborhood of the fort was situated 
at the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela. It was 
owned by two traders, Messrs. Davenport and McKinney, 
who received us in a very friendly and hospitable manner. 
Within the fort also we met with kind well-wishers, and the 
treatment we received at the hands of the gallant com- 
mander, Col. Bouquet, and all his officers, calls for my last- 
ing gratitude." (12) 

Mathew Clarkson of Philadelphia, who subsequently 
became prominent in the public life of that city, being 
mayor of the city from 1792 to 1795, was at Fort Pitt in 
1766, At this time he was connected with one of the most 
noted commercial houses in Philadelphia, which carried on 
the fur trade with the Indian tribes of the Mississippi Val- 
ley, having their headquarters at Fort Chartres. He made 
the western tour for his employers, and while on his way 
to Fort Chartres stopped at Fort Pitt, arriving on August 
18th. (13) His diary is disjointed, but throws consider- 
able light on many phases of the life of the place of which 
little is known today. Immediately upon his arrival he de- 
livered the letters which he had brought for Major William 
Murray, the commander of the fort. The first entry after 
he reached Pittsburgh reads: "Got to Fort Pitt just after 
dark, was stowed away in a small crib, on blankets, in 
company with fleas and bugs, and spent a night not the 
most comfortable." On August 10th, he wrote: "Took a 
walk to the ship-yards. Found four boats finished 
and in the water, and three more on the stocks; 
business going on briskly. Met with Major Murray, who 
had been at the store (which must have been the store 
established by General Moncton) to wait upon me with 
an invitation to dine with him today. Was extremely 
polite and obliging ; took me into the fort. — Dined with him 
at the mess-room in company with the officers in the gar- 
rison at this post. Major Murray offered me a room in the 
barracks which I accepted of. Lodged this night in Mr. 



Fort Pitt 27 

John Reid's room, the Commissary. 

He tells of hearing "Mr. McCleggan preach to the sol- 
diers in Erse — but little edified. He preaches alternately 
one Sunday in that language, and the next in English." He 
gives some information in regard to the manner in which 
letters were received at and sent from the fort. "Sent let- 
ters to forward by the Express, which sets off directly with 
monthly returns. They are forwarded by soldiers to Ship- 
pinsburg, where they are put in the Post Office, and for- 
warded to Philadelphia. The returns are made up the 24th 
of every month." He also notes the arrival at Fort Pitt of 
the Rev. Charles Beatty and Rev. George Duffield, two 
Presbyterian missionaries, "on a message among the In- 
dians to preach the Gospel. Supped with them at the 
mess." He then relates that he heard Mr. Duffield "preach 
in the town a very judicious and alarming discourse." 

The Rev. Charles Beatty, who had been at Fort Pitt 
with General Forbes' army, has also written a journal of 
the visit to Pittsburgh which he and Mr. Duffield made and 
about which Mr. Clarkson wrote. They remained at the 
place four days, and Mr. Beatty (14) tells of waiting on 
the commander of the fort whom he calls "Captain" Mur- 
ray, who received them politely and introduced them to the 
Rev. Mr. McCleggan, the chaplain of the Forty-second Regi- 
ment, part of which was in garrison there. Both mission- 
aries slept in a room in the fort, and Mr. Beatty seems to 
be very grateful because Mr. McCleggan, "with some other 
gentlemen of the place," furnished them with "blankets to 
sleep in, and some other necessaries, so that we fared as 
well as we could expect." 

On Sunday forenoon, at the invitation of Mr. McCleg- 
gan, Mr. Beatty preached to the garrison, while Mr. Duffield 
preached to the people "who live in some kind of a town 
without the fort." 

The journal most often quoted is that of George Wash- 
ington who was in Pittsburgh in 1770, while on his way to 
the Kanawha River district. On October 17th he arrived 
at Fort Pitt. "We lodged in what is called a town," he 
wrote, "distant about three hundred yards from the fort at 
one Semple's, who keeps a very good house of public en- 
tertainment. The houses are built of logs and ranged in 



28 Fort Pitt 

streets, are on the Monongahela, and I suppose may be 
about twenty in number, and inhabited by Indian traders. 
The fort is built on the point between the rivers Allegheny 
and Monongahela, but not so near the pitch of it as Fort 
Duquesne stood. It is five sided and regular, two of which 
near the land are of brick; the others stockade. A moat 
encompasses it. The garrision consists of two companies 
of Royal Irish, commanded by Captain Edmonstone." (15) 

Another glimpse of the village and the fortification is 
obtained from the diary of Rev. David Jones, already re- 
ferred to, who was there on June 4, 1772. (16) "At this 
time," he relates, "the fortification was remaining but some- 
what impaired. Here are about eighty soldiers with one 
commanding officer — East at about two hundred yards dis- 
tant, by the Monongahela, there is a small town chiefly in- 
habited by Indian traders, and some mechanics. The army 
was without a chaplain, nor was the town supplied with a 
minister. Part of the inhabitants are agreeable and worthy 
of regard, while others are lamentably dissolute in their 
morals." 

Two months after the visit of Mr. Jones, two other 
ministers of the Gospel came to Pittsburgh, the Rev. David 
McClure, and the Rev. Levi Frisbee, both Presbyterians. 
Mr. McClure kept a diary and from this an extended view 
and a most vivid picture may be obtained of life in early 
Pittsburgh. Mr. McClure made Pittsburgh his headquarters, 
preaching to the settlers in many places in Western Penn- 
sylvania, as well as to the Indians on the Muskingum, 
remaining in the country for eight or nine months. 
He arrived in Pittsburgh on August 19, 1772, and thus de- 
scribes his entry into the village. (17) 

"Arrived at this place about sunset. The first object 
of our attention was a number of poor drunken Indians, 
staggering and yelling through the village. It is the head- 
quarters of Indian traders, and the resort of Indians of 
different and distant tribes, who come to exchange their 
peltry and furs for rum, blankets and ammunition, etc." 
He describes the fort as "a handsome and strong fortifica- 
tion. In it are barracks, and comfortable houses, one large, 
brick house is called the Governor's house. It stands at the 
point of land formed by the junction of the Allegheny and 
Monongahela rivers, on an extensive plain. Adjoining are 



Fort Pitt 29 

good orchards and gardens. The village is about one-fourth 
of a mile from the fort and consists of about forty dwelling 
houses built of hewed logs and stands on the bank of the 
Monongahela." 

His first Sunday morning he spent in preaching in the 
fort to the garrison at the request of Major Hamilton. 
The greater part of the soldiers had lately arrived from 
Fort Chartres, and had not heard a sermon for four years. 
The men, about two hundred in number, were paraded 
under arms during the divine service. His companion, Mr. 
Frisbee, preached in the village in the afternoon. He com- 
ments on the character of the inhabitants, and says they 
are very dissipated. "They seem to feel themselves beyond 
the arm of the government, and freed from the 
restraining influence of religion. It is the resort of Indian 
traders ; and many here have escaped from justice and from 
creditors, in the old settlements. The greater part of the 
Indian traders keep a squaw, and some of them a white 
woman as a temporary wife." 

The reception of the missionaries by the officers of the 
fort was most friendly. On the eve of his departure for 
the Indian country, having passed the evening with Major 
Edmonstone, the commander of Fort Pitt, and the other 
officers of the garrison, Mr. McClure wrote: "The Major po- 
litely waited on me at the gate and at parting said, 'you are 
engaged in a benevolent work and you have m^y best wishes 
for your success. I am a Christian and therefore please to 
command me in anything in which I may serve you.' " 

In the entry of Oct. 19th he tells of the contem- 
plated abandonment of Fort Pitt. "In consequence of 
orders from General Gage, the garrison are preparing to 
depart. They have begun to destroy the fortress. This is 
a matter of surprise and grief to the people around who 
have requested that the fortress may stand as a place of 
security to them in case of an Indian invasion. I asked one 
of the officers, the reason of their destroying the fort, so 
necessary to the safety of the frontier. He replied, 'The 
Americans will not submit to the British Parliament and 
they may now defend themselves.' " 

Shortly before he left the place finally, on November 
19th, he made this entry in his journal, "Waited on Major 



30 Fort Pitt 

Edmonstone, who remained in the dismantled fort, expect- 
ing to leave it in a few days. — The Major appears dis- 
pleased with the manners of the people of this country. In 
conversation on the parade, he told me he had traveled 
through England, Ireland, France, Germany and Holland, 
but never knew what mankind were, till he came to that 
sta tion.'' 

REFERENCES: 

1. William M. Darlington. In Centennial Memorial Of The Plant- 
ing And Growth Of Presbyterianism In Western Pennsylvania 
And Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 267. 

2. The Navigator, Pittsburgh, 1808, p. 35. 
William M. Darlington, Supra, pp. 267-268. 

3. Colonial Records, Vol. IX, pp. 514-543. 

4. Edmund De Schweintiz. The Life And Times Of David Zeis- 
berger, Philadelphia, 1870, p. 337. 

5. Neville B. Craig, Supra, pp. 99-100. 

6. Colonial Records, Supra, pp. 514-543. 

7. William L. Stone. The Life And Times Of Sir William John- 
son Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. II, pp. 303-309. 

8. William L, Stone. Ibid. 

George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
Boston, 1879, Vol. IV, pp. 127-128. 

9. George Henry Loskiel. History Of The Mission Of The United 
Brethern A^nong The Indians In North America, London, 1794, 
Part 3, pp. 48-49. 

10. Edmund DeSchweinitz. Supra, pp. 359-360. 

11. Charles A. Hanna. The Wilderness Trail, New York, 1911, Vol. 
II, p. 287. 

12. Rev. Edward Ronthaler. Life Of John Heckewelder, Philadel- 
phia, 1847, pp. 43-45. 

13. Henry A. Schoolcroft, LL. D. Information Respecting The 
History, Condition And Prosperity Of The Indian Tribes Of The 
United States, Philadelphia, 1856, Part, IV, pp. 268-274. 

14. Charles Beatty, A. M. The Journal Of A Two Months Tour, 
London, MDCCLXVIII, pp. 28-34. 

15. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 418. 

16. Rev. David Jones. A Journal Of Two Visits Made To Some 
Nations Of Indians On The West Side Of The River Ohio, In The 
Years 1772 And 1773, New York, 1865, p. 20. 

17. Franklin B. Dexter, M. A. Diary Of David McClure, Doctor Of 
Divinity, New York, 1899, pp. 45-105. 



Fort Pitt 31 



CHAPTER IV. 
In Virginia. 



The English had now been at peace with the Indians 
for eight years. But the Indians were suspicious of them 
on account of the continued maintenance of Fort Pitt. They 
feared that the troops kept there and at the fortified places 
on the Wabash, the Illinois and the Mississippi were in- 
tended at some future time to be used against them. The 
forts were regarded as useless by the English and in order 
to conciliate the Indians, in the autumn of 1772, so it is 
alleged by several authorities. General Gage ordered their 
abandonment. (1) 

It is quite possible, however, that the remark made to 
Mr. McClure by the English officer about the abandonment 
of Fort Pitt, had more than a foundation in fact. A revolu- 
tionary spirit was already abroad, not only in the East, but 
on the border as well. Ever since the passage of the Stamp 
Act by Parliament in 1765, in pursuance of which documents 
of all kinds were to be taxed, the American Colonists had 
been irritated against England. They refused absolutely to 
obey the law and declined to buy English goods. Nor did the 
repeal of the obnoxious measure two years later allay the 
popular resentment, especially as under a new act duties 
were levied on importations; and the Americans again re- 
fused to buy from England. General Gage in 1770, had 
sent troops to Boston and the "Boston Massacre" resulted; 
and in Pittsburgh the New England spirit may have be- 
come evident. That the population was not any too friendly 
to the English is apparent from the remarks of Major 
Edmonstone to Mr. McClure, already quoted. It may have 
been quite true that Fort Pitt and the other forts were 
ordered dismantled as a precautionary measure, so that in 
case of an uprising the Colonists might not gain the ad- 
vantage of the possession of the forts and the military sup- 
plies kept there. Also the conciliation of the Indians may 
have been part of the plan of the English to win them to 
their side in case the Americans rose in arms against them. 

On October 10, 1772, Major Edmonstone, the com- 
mander of Fort Pitt, sold the buildings and materials of the 



32 Fort Pitt 

fort consisting of picketts, bricks, stone, timber and iron in 
the building and walls of the fort and in the redoubts to be 
demolished, for the sum of fifty pounds, New York cur- 
rency, to William Thompson and Alexander Ross. (2) 
Thereupon the fort was abandoned, but a corporal and three 
men were left to care for the boats and batteaux intended to 
keep up communication with the Illinois country. 

The people of Pittsburgh protested and petitioned the 
Governor of the state to intervene and prevail on General 
Gage to restore the fort. Governor Penn, however, by a 
message of January 29, 1773, recommended to the Assembly 
that a small garrison be maintained at Fort Pitt by the 
Province, (3) and in a communication dated February 5, 
1773, suggested to the Assembly that a garrison of twenty- 
five or thirty men might be placed there by the Prov- 
ince. (4) The Assembly, however, on February 19, 1773, 
declined to comply with Governor Penn's request, giving 
as a reason that it might offend the Indians with whom the 
country was at peace. (5) 

But while Fort Pitt was abandoned it was not fully 
destroyed and continued to be occupied in some way for a 
score of years afterward. Upon its evacuation by the Eng- 
lish it was taken possession of by Major Edward Ward, a 
half brother of George Croghan, the Indian trader, and 
Deputy Superintendent of Indian Affairs to Sir William 
Johnson. He was the same Ward who, while Ensign, had 
been compelled to surrender to the French the uncompleted 
fort at the forks of the Monongahela and Allegheny rivers. 

It is not quite clear by what right Ward took possession 
of Fort Pitt, but it was perhaps done as agent of or by per- 
mission of Ross and Thompson, to whom Major Edmon- 
stone had sold the materials and buildings of the fort. That 
this is probably the explanation of Ward's possession, is in- 
dicated from the fact that a petition was presented to the 
Virginia Convention on December 18, 1775, by Ross and 
Thompson, in which they asserted that they were in posses- 
sion of Fort Pitt from the time of its abandonment by 
Major Edmonstone until it was occupied by Dr. 
Connolly on January 1, 1774, (6) Ward's occupation of the 
fort ending at that time, and asking to be compensated for 
the use of the fort by Connolly. Also Ross had been the 



Fort Pitt 33 

agent in Pittsburgh for the contractor for victualling his 
Majesty's forces in North America, and was besides the 
possessor of the title to several tracts of land located about 
the fort, the grant of which had been made to him directly 
or indirectly by Major Edmonstone prior to the evacua- 
tion of Fort Pitt by the British. (7) Hence he was strongly 
suspected of being disloyal to the American cause, and was 
in fact afterward attainted of treason by Act of the Penn- 
sylvania Assembly. The possession of the property at the 
fort may therefore have been turned over to Ward whose 
loyalty was unquestioned, in order to avoid being confis- 
cated. 

In 1774 the long pending controversy between Virginia 
and Pennsylvania in regard to the boundary between 
the Colony of Virginia and the Province of Pennsylvania 
reached its climax in Pittsburgh. Lord Dunmore had been 
Royal governor of New York from October 18, 1770, to 
July 8, 1771, when he was transferred as Royal governor to 
Virginia. (B) Bancroft paints a disagreeable picture of 
Dunmore. "No Royal governor showed more rapacity for 
power. During his short career in New York he had ac- 
quired fifty thousand acres of land. Scarcely had he set- 
tled in Virginia when his greed for land caused him to be- 
come a partner in two immense purchases of land from the 
Indians in Southern Illinois." (9) From the beginning he 
had cast longing eyes on the growing settlements in West- 
ern Pennsylvania, and early in 1773 he appeared at Fort Pitt 
(10) where he met Dr. John Connolly, a Pennsylvanian by 
birth, well connected, a nephew of George Croghan, 
and the husband of the daughter of Samuel Semple 
who kept the tavern where Washington stopped in 
1770. That Connolly made a most favorable impression on 
Washington who met him on this visit, is evident from the 
entry which he made in his journal on that occasion. 
Washington had invited Connolly, together with Crog- 
han, and the officers of the fort to dine with him 
at Semple's tavern and he wrote of him that he was "a very 
sensible, intelligent man, who had traveled a good deal over 
this Western country." He quotes Connolly's views at 
length on the lands, climate and prospects of the country 
southwest of Pittsburgh. (11) To Connolly, Dunmore un- 



34 Fort Pitt 

folded his plans for extending the Virginia dominion. The 
wiley Earl claimed that Pittsburgh and the surrounding 
country was part of Virginia, being embraced in West 
Augusta, as that part of Augusta County lying west of the 
Alleghany Mountains was called. (12) He worked on Con- 
nolly's ambition and perhaps his cupidity, and easily per- 
suaded him to become the instrument for carrying out his 
plans. 

Early in January, 1774, Connolly appeared in Pitts- 
burgh bearing a commission as captain from Dunmore, and 
claimed authority to establish a new Virginia county which 
was to include Pittsburgh. His bombastic proclamation was 
dated January 1, 1774, and was posted in the village on Jan- 
uary 6th. The proclamation called upon all persons in 
Pittsburgh to assemble as militia on January 25th. (13) 
The day before they were to gather, however, Connolly was 
arrested in Pittsburgh (14) by order of Arthur St. Clair, 
later a general in the Eevolutionary War, who was then 
a Justice of the County Court, Prothonotary, Register and 
Recorder of Westmoreland County, and committed to jail 
at Hannastown. But Connolly's arrest did not prevent the 
assembling of some of the people as militia. On February 
2nd St. Clair wrote to Governor Denny of Pennsylvania, (15) 
'T was in hopes that the sending him (Connolly) out of the 
way would put an end to it altogether, but I was mistaken. 
About eighty persons in arms assembled themselves, 
chiefly from Mr. Croghan's neighborhood and the country 
west and below the Monongahela, and after parading through 
the town and making a kind of feu de joy, proceeded to the 
fort, where a cask of rum was produced on the parade, and 
the head knocked out. This was a very effectual way of 
recruiting." 

Connolly, however, was soon released on his own recog- 
nizance. (16) In a few days he returned to Pittsburgh 
and from there went to Redstone where he collected a body 
of armed men, and then proceeded to Staunton, Virginia, 
where he was sworn in as a justice of the peace of Augusta 
County. Armed with civil authority, as well as the military 
power which he already possessed, he reappeared in Pitts- 
burgh on March 28th, (17) with a body of militia and took 
possession of Fort Pitt, changing the name of both the fort 




Lord Dunmcre 




The Ducking Stool. 



Fort Pitt 35 

and the village to Fort Dunmore. 

He reconstructed and refurnished the fort, using it 
principally as a jail or lockup for the imprisonment of those 
who opposed him. (18) That many of the settlers sup- 
ported Connolly's contentions is beyond question. Bancroft 
says, (19) "The western people, especially the emigrants 
from Maryland and Virginia, spurned the meek tenets of 
the Quakers, and inclined to the usurpation," — and with 
this powerful support Connolly carried through his meas- 
ures with a high hand, appointing civil and military officers, 
levying taxes on peltries (20), arresting and imprisoning 
those who refused to obey his orders. Jurisdiction was now 
opposed to jurisdiction, arrests were followed by counter 
arrests; and the Western country became a scene of con- 
fusion. 

Since February, 1774, there had been a number of In- 
dian outrages in the Western country, which were met with 
terrible reprisals by the whites. The Indians were for war. 
Dunmore called out the militia of Western Virginia and 
proceeded to Pittsburgh where he collected his forces, and 
in September, 1774, with about twelve hundred men, raised 
in the Northwestern counties of Virginia and about Pitts- 
burgh, he descended the Ohio River. When he reached the 
Scioto River, however, the fighting was over, General Andrew 
Lewis, the commander of the militia of Southwestern Vir- 
ginia, having defeated the Indians at Point Pleasant. (21) 
This ended the war, and Dunmore, foreseeing the approach- 
ing Revolution, arranged such terms of peace with the In- 
dians, that they subsequently became the allies of the 
British. (22) Connolly, who had been more or less occu- 
pied with this war, now returned to Pittsburgh. 

At Hannastown the Pennsylvania adherents were still 
attempting to enforce the laws of that state, and on Decem- 
ber 12, 1774, Dunmore issued a writ in the name of his 
Brittanic Majesty, adjourning the county court of Augusta 
County from Staunton, the county seat of Augusta County, 
to Fort Dunmore and the first term was held there on Feb- 
ruary 21, 1775. (23) The Virginia laws provided for the 
ducking stool as a punishment for evilly disposed women, 
and one of the first acts of the court at Fort Dunmore was 
at the session held on February 22nd^ at whiqli Connolly 



36 Fort Pitt 

presided, to instruct the sheriff to employ a workman to 
' build a ducking stool at the confluence of the Ohio and Mo- 
nongahela rivers. (24) 

But'Dunmore's power was rapidly drawing to a close. 
The Revolution was beginning, the battle of Lexington was 
fought on April 19, 1775. The Second Continental Congress 
met in Philadelphia on May 10th. The Virginia Convention 
which convened at Richmond on March 20, 1775, to appoint 
delegates to the new Continental Congress, had taken meas- 
ures for enrolling companies of volunteers in each county, 
and before daylight on June 8th, Lord Dunmore and his 
family fled from Williamsburg, and took refuge on board 
the Fowey, an English man of war, lying at Yorktown. (25) 
On July 25th, Connolly left Fort Dunmore (26) to join Dun- 
more. He never returned to Pittsburgh, his rule was at an 
end, and like his employer, he espoused the British cause. 

The leaders in the newly formed government viewed 
with alarm the troubles existing between Virginia and Penn- 
sylvania, and on the day that Connolly shook the dust of 
Pittsburgh from his feet, the delegates in Congress from 
both Virginia and Pennsylvania published an address to the 
"Inhabitants of Pennsylvania and Virginia on the west side 
of Laurel Hill," whom they designated "Friends and Country- 
men." The address was signed by Patrick Henry, Richard 
Henry Lee, Benjamin Harrison and Thomas Jefferson of 
Virginia, and by John Dickenson, George Ross, Benjamin 
Franklin, James Wilson and Charles Humphries of Pennsyl- 
vania. It referred to the unhappy condition existing west 
of Laurel Hill and begged the inhabitants to terminate their 
differences, dismiss their armed men, release their prison- 
ers, and suggested that until the dispute was decided, every 
person should be permitted to retain his possessions unmo- 
lested. (27) 

But the danger of civil war in Western Pennsylvania 
between the adherents of that Province and those of Vir- 
ginia was not yet over. The claim of Virginia to the dis- 
puted land was not surrendered at Dunmore's flight, and 
although she had driven him from Williamsburg and was 
intensely loyal to the Revolution and was standing shoulder 
to shoulder with Pennsylvania in the movement, she did 
not loosen her grip on the western end of that Province. The 



Fort Pitt 37 

first Provincial Convention organized by the Revolutionary- 
Virginians met at Williamsburg on August 1, 1774, and 
again at Richmond on March 20, 1775, Williamsburg being 
no longer a safe place for treason mongers. (28) At the 
session held in July, 1775, it appointed a Committee of 
Safety. This body was given authority to commission offi- 
cers, direct military movements, issue warrants on the Treas- 
ury, and all commanding officers were directed to pay strict 
obedience to its orders. (29) The Committee of Safety com- 
missioned John Neville of Frederick County, captain of 
militia, and on August 7th ordered him to proceed with his 
company of one hundred men to Fort Pitt and take posses- 
sion. Captain Neville was probably selected for this service 
because he had been a resident of Pittsburgh for some time, 
having made large entries of land on Chariters Creek under 
the Virginia laws, and having been elected to the Virginia 
Provincial Convention from Augusta County in the previous 
year, but being prevented from attending on account of 
illness. 

During all of this time of turmoil and controversy, the 
adherents of both Virginia and Pennsylvania were loyal to 
their oppressed brethren in Massachusetts. On May 16, 

1775, only four weeks after the battle of Lexington, meet- 
ings were held by the Virginians at Pittsburgh, (30) and by 
the Pennsylvanians at Hannastown, (31) at which resolu- 
tions were adopted unanimously approving the New England 
movement; and steps were taken to organize, arm and 
discipline the militia in order to meet whatever might betide. 
The better to carry out their designs the Hannastown meet- 
ing organizd themselves into the Association of Westmore- 
land County. At the same time the meeting proclaimed their 
loyalty to King George the Third. 

On July 12th, Congress created three Indian depart- 
ments of which one was to be west of the Alleghany Moun- 
tains, called the Middle Department. (32) Richard Butler 
was made agent of this department with headquarters at 
Pittsburgh, and continued as such until April 10, 

1776, when he resigned in order to assist in the 
organization of a regiment, which became the Eighth 
Regiment of the Pennsylvania Line, and of which he was 
commissioned major by Congress on July 20, 1776. He was 



§8 Fort Pitt 

succeeded as Indian agent by George Morgan. Shortly- 
after Morgan assumed the duties of the office there were 
indications of Indian troubles. Consequently a hundred men 
were raised in Westmoreland County for this service if 
needed, and in September, Congress issued an order as- 
sembling all the militia that could be spared, for the defense 
of Fort Pitt. (33) Powder, lead and ten thousand flints 
were forwarded to Morgan, but the Indians remained quiet 
and neither the militia, the powder, lead or flints were 
needed. 

The Virginia Provincial convention which convened at 
Richmond on July 17, 1775, divided Virginia into sixteen 
districts. West Augusta being created one of the districts, 
(34) and a law enacted in October, 1776, defined the 
boundary between Augusta County and the District of West 
Augusta. On November 8, 1776, the legislature divided the 
district of West Augusta into three counties, Ohio, Monon- 
galia and Yohogania, nearly all of the last, which included 
Pittsburgh, and much of the other two being composed of 
Pennsylvania territory. (35) Delegates were elected to 
the Virginia Provincial Council, and after the passage of 
the Act of 1776, senators and delegates to the legislature, 
and all the other officers in the district were elected or ap- 
pointed under the Virginia laws. Troops were raised for 
the Revolutionary armies, the Sixth Virginia Regiment 
being attached to Muhlenberg's brigade. (36) The Thir- 
teenth Regiment was known as the West Augusta Regi- 
ment. (37) The Seventh Virginia Regiment was the first 
considerable body of men raised in the Monongahela coun- 
try, (38) Justice's courts were now held regularly, those of 
Yohogania County being held in the upper story of a log 
jail and court house 24x16 feet, on the farm of Andrew 
Heath on the Monongahela River, nearly opposite and a lit- 
tle above West Elizabeth, and at or near the location of 
Elizabeth. (39) Virginia granted lands to settlers, taxes 
were levied but frequently not paid, the disputed jurisdic- 
tion between Pennsylvania and Virginia giving to many of 
the disaffected a chance to shirk their payment as well as 
avoid military service. (40) Roads, mills, taverns and 
ferries were authorized, and the Pennsylvanians obeyed the 
Virginia laws and applied to the courts of that Colony or 



Fort Pitt 3d 

state, and brought and defended suits there when necessary. 

On December 18, 1776, Virginia, through its legislature, 
proposed a certain line as the boundary between the two 
states and suggested that a joint commission be appointed 
to agree upon a boundary line to which proposal Pennsyl- 
vania refused to consent. On July 5, 1777, the Supreme 
Executive Council of Pennsylvania made an effort to bring 
about an agreement by sending a letter to the Virginia dele- 
gates in Congress, proposing a settlement, but nothing came 
of the matter. 

On February 7, 1777, the Virginia Provincial Council 
directed the raising in Yohogania County of a company of 
militia to consist of a hundred men to garrison Fort Pitt 
and relieve Captain Neville's company. Robert Campbell 
was made captain of this company and commanded at the 
fort (41) until the arrival of Brigadier General Edward 
Hand on June 1st. 

In the meantime Captain Neville had been ordered to 
join the Eighth Virginia Regiment, known as the German 
Regiment, so called because it was largely composed of 
young men of German birth or extraction. It was organized 
on December 1, 1775, by the Rev. Peter Muhlenberg, pastor 
of the German Lutheran Church at Woodstock, and at least 
one company, that of Captain Stinson, came from about 
Pittsburgh. (42) Muhlenberg was made colonel, and the 
regiment became historic, not only on account of its achieve- 
ments in the Revolution, but also by reason of the glowing 
verses of Thomas Buchannan Read. The poet's picture 
is prescient of war. It was Sunday morning; the church 
was crowded with worshippers from far and near. The 
pastor was in his pulpit declaiming about the impending 
conflict. 

"When suddenly his mantle wide 
His hands impatient flung aside, 
And lo! he met their wondering eyes 
Complete in all a warriors guise." 

Outside before the open church door the trumpets were 
calling to the men to enlist ; the drum and the fife were firing 
them "with fiercer life," while overhead the church bell rang 
out wildly, and the word that is spoke was, 

"War! War! War! War!" 



4d Fort Pitt 

Muhlenberg having been made brigadier general on 
February 21, 1777, and the regiment afterwards also los- 
ing the two colonels who had successively follov/ed him, 
Neville became colonel on December 11, 1777. On Septem- 
ber 14, 1778, the regiment was merged into the Fourth Vir- 
ginia Regiment, of which Neville became colonel on June 1, 
1778. (44) After the war Colonel Neville returned to 
Pittsburgh and became one of its most prominent citizens. 

It was only at Hannastown, the county seat of West- 
moreland County, and in the contiguous country that the 
Pennsylvania jurisdiction continued. After the April term 
of 1776, however, no sessions of this court were held until 
1778, (45) the Assembly of the state having on January 
28, 1777, under the first constitution, provided for reorgan- 
izing the courts, and the first term of the Westmoreland 
County court began with the July, 1778, session. (46) 

Westmoreland County was not behind the District 
of West Augusta in raising troops, and as early as 
May 24, 1775, in pursuance of the resolution adopted at 
Hannastown on May 16th, the Associators of Westmore- 
land County began organizing themselves into companies, 
which were formed into a regiment of two battalions, the 
First Battalion being commanded by John Proctor. Con- 
gress having on May 26th resolved that the Colonies be put 
into a state of defense, (47) the Pennsylvania Assembly on 
June 30th (48) created the Council of Safety, delegated 
with power to call the Associators into actual service. 
Thereupon the Regiment of Westmoreland County Asso- 
ciators was reorganized, and became part of the militia of 
the state. The First Battalion was called to Philadelphia 
in January, 1777, (49) and was later stationed in the West. A 
flag had been adopted by this battalion which was one of 
the first, if not the first. Rebel flag to appear in the Western 
country, and was the first Colonial flag to be flaunted in 
Pittsburgh in defiance of British authority. On its crimson 
folds alongside of the cross of St. George, was a rattlesnake 
with thirteen rattles, and the warning motto, "Don't tread 
on me !" 

The Eighth Regiment of the Pennsylvania Line was 
another body of Western Pennsylvania troops, seven of the 
eight companies being organized in Westmoreland County, 




Flag of the First Battalion of the Regiment of Westmoreland 
County Associators 

The letters J. P. I. B. W. C. P., are the initials of the words, "John 
Proctor's First Battalion, Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania." 



Fort Pitt 41 

and seeing service in the East and at Fort Pitt. (50) Other 
troops raised in Westmoreland County were two companies 
of the Second Pennsylvania Battalion, of Colonel Arthur St. 
Clair. Westmoreland County also furnished men to the 
Third and other Pennsylvania regiments. 

At last, on December 18, 1778, Virginia proposed a joint 
commission to agree upon a boundary line. To this Penn- 
sylvania acceded in March, 1779. (51) The Commission 
met in Baltimore in August, and on the 31st agreed 
that Mason and Dixon's line should be extended 
westward, and that private property rights acquired under 
the laws of either state were to be fully recognized. The 
report was ratified by the Pennsylvania legislature on No- 
vember 19, 1779. But Virginia was not yet ready to sur- 
render her claims, and in December sent into the disputed 
territory three commissioners to adjust land titles therein, 
this action being authorized by an act of her legislature of 
May 3, 1779, enacted after her proposal for the boundary 
commissioners but prior to their report. The land-adjusting 
commissioners met at various points and granted a hundred 
certificates to claimants under Virginia settlement rights. 
(52) 

The differences between the two states were a disturb- 
ing element in the new republic and late in 1779 Congress 
adopted a resolution recommending to the two states "not 
to grant any part of the disputed territory or disturb the 
possession of any person living therein until the dispute 
can be amicably adjusted between the two states." (53) 
This resolution came up in the Pennsylvania Council on 
December 28th and a proclamation was ordered to be issued 
in accordance with the recommendation of Congress. (54) 
Virginia still held back and Pennsylvania, no longer ruled 
by the Quaker government, became impatient of further 
delay, and on March 24, 1780, through its Council, adopted 
threatening preambles and resolutions which breathed war. 
"But if Pennsylvania must arm for internal defense," the 
resolution recited, "instead of recruiting her Continental 
line; if her attention and supplies must be diverted in like 
manner; if the common enemy encouraged by our division 
should prolong the war; interests of our sister states and 
the common cause be injured or disturbed; we trust 



42 Fort Pitt 

we shall stand justly acquitted before them and the whole 
world." (55) 

But on June 23rd, Virginia confirmed the commissioners 
report on condition that rights acquired by persons to whom 
lands had been granted by Virginia be saved ; and the Vir- 
ginia Court of Yohogania County closed its records on 
August 28, 1780, (56) and the power of Virginia was with- 
drawn. 

The conditional agreement by Virginia had yet to be 
ratifie(d by Pennsylvania, and on September 23rd, that 
state agreed to the condition attached to Virginia's ratifica- 
tion and confirmed and ratified the agreement of August 
31, 1779. A survey had yet to be made and as 
Virginia was then being invaded by the British, and 
her affairs were in some confusion, at the suggestion of 
Governor Thomas Jefferson, contained in a letter of June 
3, 1781, a temporary line was agreed upon between Pennsyl- 
vania and Virginia to hold good during the continuance of 
the war. While the temporary line was being fixed on the 
ground, the surveyors were under the protection of two 
hundred militia, for fear of trouble from the Virginia ad- 
herents. They made their report on February 19, 1783. (57) 
The ratification by Pennsylvania of September 23, 1780, was 
finally confirmed by Act of the Legislature on April 1, 1784. 
After the Revolution was over the permanent line was run, 
the commissioners making their final report on August 23, 
1785. (58) 

The western boundary was still to be run and this was 
completed on October 4, 1786. (59) 

REFERENCES: 

1. William L. Stone. The Life And Times Of Sir William Johnson 
Bart, Albany, 1865, Vol. II, 356. 

Johann David Schoepf. Travels In The Confederation, 1783- 
1784, Philadelphia, 1911, Vol. I, p. 247. 

2. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, 463-464. 

3. Colonial Records, Vol, X, pp. 68-69. 

4. Ibid, p. 71. 

5. Ibid, pp. 74-75. 

6. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1848, Vol. II, pp. 94-95. 

7. The Records Of Deeds For The District Of West Augusta, Vir- 
ginia, &c.. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, Vol. Ill, No. 2, 1905, 
pp. 285-290. 

'8. William L. Stone. Supra pp. 338-346. 



Fort Pitt 43 

9. George Bancroft. History Of The United States Of America, 
Vol. IV, pp. 418-419. 

10. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
Philadelphia, 1882, p. 168. 

11. The Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 432. 

12. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 172. 

13. Colonial Records, Vol. X, pp. 140-142. 

14. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 4, p. 484. 

15. Ibid, pp. 476-477. 

16. Neville B. Craig. The History Of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
pp. 112-113. 

17. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 484. 

18. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, pp. 628-632. 

19. George Bancroft. Supra, p. 419. 

20. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 628. 

21. Early History Of Western Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, 1846, pp. 
181-185. 

22. Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
vania And Virginia, 1748-1785, Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 
Vol. I, p. 517. 

Alexander Scott Withers. Chronicles Of Border Warfare, Cin- 
cinnati, 1895, p. 181. 

23. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 518. 

24. Ibid, p. 530. 

25. John Esten Cooke. Virginia — A History Of The People, Boston 
1885, p. 434. 

26. William Henry Smith. The St. Clair Papers, Cincinnati, 1882, 
Vol. I, p. 362. 

27. John J. Jacob. A Biographical Sketch Of The Life Of The 
Late Captain Michael Cresap, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1866, pp. 51-52, 

28. John Esten Cooke. Supra, p. 427. 

29. Ibid, p. 435. 

30. The Olden Time, Supra, pp. 572-575. 

31. Ibid, pp. 575-576. 

32. Journal Of Congress, Vol. I, p. 151. 

33. Ibid, Vol. II, p. 250. 

34. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
Philadelphia, 1882, p. 182. 

35. James Veech. Mason And Dixon's Line, Pittsburgh, 1857, pp. 
52-53. 

Alfred Creigh, LL. D. History Of Washington County, p. 15. 

36. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Richmond, 
Virginia, 1912, Vol. XX, pp. 276-277. 

37. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 77. 

38. Ibid, pp. 76-77. 

39. James Veech. Supra, p. 52. 

40. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Retreat On The Upper Ohio 
Madison, 1917, p. 22. 

41. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madison» 
Wisconsin, 1882, p. 8. 

42. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, p. 268- 
Henry A. Muhlenberg. The Life Of Major-General Peter Muhl- 
enberg, Philadelphia, 1849, p. 73. 

43. Thomas Buchannan Read. The Waggoner Of The Alleghanies, 
Philadelphia, 1868, pp. 89-91. 



44 Fort Pitt 

44. The Virginia Magazine Of History And Biography, Supra, p. 269 

45. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 183. 

46. Ibid, p. 156. 

47. Journal Of Congress. Vol. I, p. 99. 

48. Lewis S. Shimmell. Border Warfare In Pennsylvania, Harris- 
burg, 1901, pp. 46-47. 

49. Boyd Crumrine. Supra, p. 85. 
Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. V, p. 202. 

50. Colonial Records, Vol. II, p. 110. 
Boyd Crumrine. Supra, pp. 77-78. 

51. James Veech. In Centennial Memorial Of The Planting And 
Growth Of Presbyterianism in Western Pennsylvania and 
Parts Adjacent, Pittsburgh, 1876, p. 333. 

52. Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
vania and Virginia, 1748-1785. Annals of the Carnegie Museum, 
Vol. I, p. 522. 

53. Colonial Records, Vol, XII pp. 210-211. 

54. Ibid, pp. 212-214. 

55. Ibid, pp. 289-292. 

56. Smith Xessee v. Brown. 1 Yeates, p. 514. 

Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania 
Philadelphia, 1882. p. 195. 

Boyd Crumrine. The Boundary Controversy Between Pennsyl- 
vania And Virginia. Supra, p, 521, 

57. Boyd Crumrine. History Of Washington County, Pennsylvania, 
pp. 197-199. 

58. Ibid, p. 203. 

59. Ibid, p. 203. 






N 


13 




-u 


rr- 










g 


C 


o 


M 


<: 


Oi 






t> 


M 


n 


1— 1 


^ 


03 


fi 


<U 


TS 




h-1 


a 




>5 


1— ( 


3 


'T3 




J-i 


OJ 


=H 






c4 


cu 




o 




M 





< 



p4 



Fort Pitt 45 



CHAPTER V. 
Under the Continental Congress 



General Hand had been appointed by the Continental 
Congress to the command of the Western Department, com- 
posed of the counties of Westmoreland and Washington 
in Pennsylvania, and Monongalia and Ohio in \^irginia, 
with headquarters at Fort Pitt (1) because the people v/est 
of Pittsburgh had become fearful of an Indian uprising. 
(2) On June 1, 1777, he arrived at Fort Pitt, escorted by 
a troop of Westmoreland lighthorse militia. (3) The 
force under his command consisted of a few regulars, the 
balance being militia, and with these little could be accom- 
plished against the Indians who were threatening. The boun- 
dary controversy between Virginia and Pennsylvania was 
still on, and Hand was early accused of taking sides with 
Pennsylvania. Then on March 28, 1778, he allowed the Loy- 
alists, Mathew Elliott, Alexander McKee and Simon Girty, 
and two others whom he had under surveillance, through 
too much leniency, to escape from Fort Pitt to the British 
lines, and on May 2, 1778, he was recalled by resolution of 
Congress. (4) 

On May 19, 1778, Washington appointed Brigadier 
General Lachlan Mcintosh as Hand's successor. (5) 
On August 6th he assumed command at Fort Pitt. His 
greatest achievement was the treaty which he concluded 
with the Delawares at Fort Pitt on September 19, 1778, 
whereby they bound themselves to the American cause and 
agreed to join in the contemplated expedition against the 
Western Indians. Late in October, Mcintosh left Fort Pitt 
and proceeded to the mouth of Beaver Creek, where many 
of the regular troops and militia had preceded him, and 
had begun building a large stockade which was called Fort 
Mcintosh after the General. The main body of the army 
consisting of twelve hundred men, more than half of whom 
were militia from northwestern Virginia, proceeded as far 



46 Fort Pitt 

as the Tuscarawas, where the Delaware Indians met them. 
Fort Laurens was built; winter came on; dissatisfaction 
arose between the officers, the campaign proved a failure 
and on February 20, 1779, at his own request, Mcintosh 
was recalled by resolution of Congress. (6) 

Colonel Daniel Brodhead, who had been Mc- 
intosh's second in command, was appointed to succeed 
him on March 5, 1779. (7) On April 5th, Mc- 
intosh surrendered the command to Brodhead. (8) 
Great plans were in contemplation, but they all 
ended in a campaign against the Indians on the upper Al- 
legheny River, which began on August 11th. Rroahead 
proceeded as far as the present boundary of the state of 
New York, but the Indians had burned their villages and 
fled before the approaching army. (9) On April 7, 1781, 
Brodhead left Fort Pitt on his expedition against the Dela- 
ware Indians at Coshocton, who had gone over to the 
Eritifc'h. Completely surprised, the Indians were easily 
overcome, many being taken prisoners and the remainder 
dispersed; and their town was destroyed. (10) 

It was during this time that part of the ground 
belonging to Fort Pitt began to be encroached upon 
by settlers and Colonel Brodhead wrote about the 
matter to the Secretary of War. On June 22, 
1779, he also complained to Timothy Pickering, 
President of Pennsylvania: "The inhabitants of this place 
are continually encioaching on what I conceive to be the 
rights of the garrison * * *. They have now the assur- 
ance to erect their fences within a few yards of the bas- 
tions * * *. The block houses likewise, which are part 
of the strength of the place, are occupied by private i ar- 
sons to the injury of the service.". (11) On November 22, 
1779, he again wrote to Pickering, "I hope the Hon. Con- 
gress has come to a determination what extent of clear 
ground to allow this garrison. The inhabitants on this side 
the Alleghany Hills profess a great law knowledge, and it 
would be exceedingly disagreeable to me to be pestered 
with their silly courts, and therefore the service will suffer 
until the pleasure of Congress is known respecting it." (12) 

At Fort Pitt provisions were obtained with difficulty. 
The inhabitants of the neighboring country refused to ac- 



Fort Pitt 47. 

cept the depreciated Continental currency. At Pittsburgh 
the troops marched in a body to the commandant's house 
and protested against their lack of rations. Force was re- 
sorted to to obtain the needed provisions. Charges were 
made against Brodhead that he was taking advantage of 
his position to further his private interests. (13) On May 
5, 1781, Washington summoned Brodhead to Philadelphia, 
and on May 6th, Brodhead turned over the command to 
Colonel John Gibson and the next day left for that city. 
(14) On September 24th, Brigadier General William Ir- 
vine was appointed by Congress to the command of the 
Western Department. 

Leaving Philadelphia on October 9th, (15) Irvine prob- 
ably reached Fort Pitt in the middle or latter part of the 
month. At Yorktown, Virginia, on October 19th, Com- 
wallis had surrendered the flovv^er of the British forces in 
America to the allied American and French armies, and 
the war was practically over. The news of the great vic- 
tory reached Fort Pitt shortly after Irvine's arrival and 
his first important act was on November 6th to issue a 
proclamation congratulating the troops on the surrender, 
and ordering thirteen pieces of artillery be fired at one 
o'clock in the fort, at which time the troops were to be 
under arms, with their colors displayed. He further di- 
rected the commissary to issue "a gill of liquor extraord- 
inary to the non-commissioned officers and privates on this 
joyful occasion." (16) 

During the administration of both Mcintosh and 
Brodhead at Fort Pitt, the works had been sadly 
neglected and at the close of Brodhead's command 
the fort was said to be almost in ruins. This policy was 
immediately changed under Irvine. On December 3, 1781, 
he wrote to the Board of War : "Any person to look at the 
place and be told that a number of artificers were employed, 
I believe they would rather imagine they were pulling down 
than building up or repairing. Such a complete heap of 
ruins to retain the name of a post, I believe cannot be found 
in any other place." (17) And in the summer of 1782, 
Irvine made extensive repairs. On October 29th he wrote 
to Washington about them: "A new row of picketing is 
planted on every part of the parapet where the brick re- 



48 Fort Pitt 

vetment did not extend, and a row of palisading is nearly- 
finished to the ditch — above all a complete new magazine, 
the whole arched with stone — some parts of the ramparts 
and parapets are much broken down, a new main gate and 
drawbridge are wanted and some small earthworks are 
necessary to be erected." (18) 

It was during this time that the British planned an 
attack on Fort Pitt, and a force of three hundred soldiers 
and five hundred Indians with twelve pieces of artillery, 
was sent from Canada for the purpose. They reached 
Lake Chautauqua and had already embarked in canoes for 
the further journey when word was received from spies, 
that the fort had been repaired and much strengthened. 
In consequence of this information the campaign was aban- 
doned and the soldiers returned to Canada. Detachments 
of Indians, together with numerous Tories, were, however, 
sent out in different directions to harass the settlements 
on the borders of Pennsylvania. One of these bands, con- 
sisting of three hundred Indians and sixty Tories, under 
command of Kiyasuta, the Seneca chief, who had been 
so conspicuous in the Indian war of 1763, fell upon Hannas- 
town on July 13, 1782. 

The county court had just adjourned and those in at- 
tendance had gone to their homes, and many had resumed 
their labors in the fields when the foe appeared. The object 
of the attacking party seemed to be to surprise the inhab- 
itants and make them prisoners, rather than to attack 
them, but at the first alarm the settlers had hastened into 
the blockhouse. Thereupon the Indians and Tories began 
a vigorous attack on the building. Being unable to reduce 
the structure they commenced plundering the houses in 
the village, finally setting them on fire. This accomplished, 
the force withdrew, carrying with them their booty and the 
few prisoners they had taken. 

Large areas, both in New York and Pennsylvania and 
to the westward of both states, were still owned by the In- 
dians. The country across the Allegheny and Ohio rivers 
from Fort Pitt was all Indian territory and was forbidden 
to white men, and on February 25, 1783, Irvine issued an 
order regarding the same- (19) "Persons ferrying, either 
men or women, across the Allegheny River, or who shall 



Fort Pitt 49 

be found crossing into what is generally called the Indian 
Country, between Kittanning and Fort Mcintosh, without 
a written permit from the commanding officer at Fort Pitt 
or orders for that purpose — until further orders, shall be 
treated and prosecuted for holding or aiding others to cor- 
respond and give intelligence to the enemy." 

The Revolution being over, Irvine, on October 1, 1783, 
left Pittsburgh finally (20) , Captain Marbury assuming the 
command in his place. 

Peace was declared by a preliminary treaty between 
Great Britain and the United States on November 30, 
1782, the definitive treaty being signed at Versailles on Sep- 
tember 3, 1783. Immigration to the West was now re- 
sumed and soon reached dimensions hitherto unknown. 
Also travelers came for purposes of pleasure, trade, or to 
inspect the lands in the Western country, who either made 
Pittsburgh the end of their journey, or tarried there in order 
to prepare for a continuation farther west. Among the earli- 
est of the foreigners to arrive was Dr. Johann David Schoepf , 
who had been chief surgeon of the Anspach troops, a con- 
tingent of the German auxiliaries who fought on the 
British side in the Revolution, (21) accompanied by an 
Englishman named Hairs. The two men arrived in Pitts- 
burgh on September 6, 1783, and remained seven days. 
Speaking of their reception. Dr. Schoepf relates: "Not we, 
but our vehicle, had the honor of being the first object of 
their curiosity, for we had come the whole way in a two- 
wheeled chaise." The place, he said, "numbers at 
this time perhaps sixty wooden houses and cabins, in which 
live something more than a hundred families * * *. The 
first stone house was built this summer. * * * Of public 
houses of worship or justice, there are none as yet. The 
state of Pennsylvania, as is customary in this country, 
sends hither a judge once or twice a year to administer the 
law * * *. However little to be regarded the place is 
now, from its advantageous site, it must be that Pittsburgh 
will in the future become an important depot for inland 
trade." He expressed his gratitude for the reception ac- 
corded him by the men to whom he had been opposed in 
the war just closed. "I should not fail to mention the 



50 Fort Pitt 

courtesies and assistance rendered us by the officers of 
the garrison, and I must especially acknowledge our obliga- 
tions to the commander of the fort, General Irvine, and to 
Colonel Bayard." 

Another distinguished stranger who came to 
Pittsburgh shortly after the Revolution, was General 
Peter Muhlenberg, the former pastor of the German 
Lutheran Church at Woodstock, whose services in the Rev- 
olution had enabled him to attain the rank of major gen- 
eral. He remained for three weeks while on his way to 
the Falls of Ohio, now Louisville, having been appointed 
by Virginia one of the Superintendents to locate lands in- 
tended for the officers and soldiers of the Virginia line in 
the Continental service- (22) He was accompanied by his 
friend. Captain Paske', and records that he reached "Fort 
Pitt" in the afternoon of March 10, 1784. He must have 
attracted attention even in this frontier settlement as he 
rode into town, having, as he relates, a "perfect resemblance 
to Robinson Crusoe." He states that he had "four belts 
around him, carried two brace of pistols, wore a sword and 
had a rifle slung over his shoulder, and carried a pouch 
and a tobacco-pipe, which was not a small one." He con- 
cludes his description: "Add to this the blackness of my 
face, which occasioned the inhabitants to take me for a 
traveling Spaniard." General Muhlenberg spent his time 
while in Pittsburgh in preparing for the further journey, 
his leisure being employed in "trying to catch some Ohio 
fish, which, according to report, are very large ; but hitherto 
I have been unsuccessful, as the river is too full of ice." 

When the boat on which General Muhlenberg and the 
party with which he was now traveling left Pittsburgh, was' 
passing Logstown, where his grandfather, Conrad Weiser, 
had held his conference with the Indians in 1748, it ran 
aground on an island. It was near sunset, and as the boat 
could not be floated, they were compelled to stay all night. 
The occupants of the boat became uneasy. On the north 
side of the river was the Indian Country, and they were 
fearful of an attack. The Indians, although at peace with 
the whites, could probably not "withstand the great temp- 
tation of plundering a boat so richly laden as ours," Muhl- 
enburg writes. The company was therefore divided into 



TWO RELICS OF FORT PITT. 

From Sketches made by Russell Smith in 1832. 







imm 









^■^x^ 






t^>::-^^^^^^ 



The Old Redoubt. 




The Powder Magazine. 



Fort Pitt x" 51 

four watches and placed under his orders. He admits that 
he felt anxious. "For I must confess that I did not hear 
the noise of the wild fowl, the screaming loons, the hooting 
owls, and the howling wolves, which continued around us 
all night, with total indifference." 

Early in 1784, Congress appointed three commissioners 
to meet the Six Nations on the northern and western 
frontiers, and purchase their western lands. On February 
3, 1784, Pennsylvania also appointed commissioners to 
acquire the Indian lands in Pennsylvania, (23) who were 
to meet with the United States commissioners. All the 
commissioners met the Indians at Fort Schuyler (more 
generally known by its former and subsequent name of 
Fort Stanwix), beginning on October 3, 1784. The treaty 
was signed with the United States commissioners on Oc- 
tober 22nd and with the Pennsylvania commissioners the 
next day, (24) and all the Indian lands in Pennsylvania, 
north and west of the Allegheny River, except certain 
lands at Erie, were ceded to Pennsylvania. One of the 
United States commissioners was Arthur Lee, of Virginia, 
who, together with Dr. Franklin and Silas Deane, had been 
joint commissioners of the United States to the Court of 
France during the Revolution. Lee kept a journal from 
Philadelphia to Fort Schuyler, and after the conclusion of 
the treaty with the Six Nations, continued the journal 
through Western Pennsylvania while on the way to Cuya- 
hoga, now Cleveland, where a conference was to be held 
with the Western Indians- The party came by way of Sun- 
bury and Carlisle and consisted of the United States com- 
missioners, George Rogers Clark, Richard Butler and 
Arthur Lee, and arrived at Fort Pitt on December 2, 1784. 
(25) 

On December 5th a conference was held with Colonel 
Josiah Harmer, who commanded the Pennsylvania troops 
on the frontier, in the Indian Country on the opposite side of 
the Allegheny River from Fort Pitt, where he was en- 
camped, with a force of soldiers intended as an escort for 
the commissioners on the further journey. Here it was 
decided that owing to the lateness of the season and the 
difficulty in securing supplies, the conference should be 
held at Fort Mcintosh, thirty miles distant, Aft^r a stay 



52 Fort Pitt 

of several weeks at Fort Pitt, the commissioners proceeded 
to Fort Mcintosh, where the Pennsylvania commissioners 
met them, and where the conference was finally held and 
the deeds granting the lands to the United States and to 
Pennsylvania were signed on January 21, 1785. (26) 

During his stay in Pittsburgh, Lee wrote down his im- 
pressions of the place: ''Pittsburgh is inhabited almost 
entirely by Scots and Irish, who live in paltry log-houses, 
and are as dirty as in the north of Ireland and Scotland. 
There is a great deal of small trade carried on, the goods 
being brought at the vast expense of forty-five shillings 
per hundred weight from Philadelphia and Baltimore. They 
take in the shops, money, wheat, flour and skins. There 
are in the town four attorneys and two doctors." He also 
expressed the opinion that the place would "never be very 
considerable." In this respect the subsequent history of 
Pittsburgh has shown that his judgment was of far less 
value than that of Dr. Schoepf. 

Religion also had begun to reassert itself in Pittsburgh 
in the bosoms of those who, owing to the vicissitudes of 
their new life, had neglected its outward observance. 
Wandering clerics came and preached in the fort or in some 
public house in the town, but house of worship there was 
none. The strain of the Revolution being over and the 
stress of adverse material circumstances being lessened, 
the people began yearning for the spiritual life which they 
had led in their old homes in the East, and a desire for a 
church home developed. The majority of the people in 
Pittsburgh and its vicinity were either Scotch-Irish or 
German. The former were Presbyterians, while the latter 
were divided in their church affiliations between the Evan- 
gelical and Reformed faiths. The Germans were the first to 
organize a congregation, their church dating from 1782. 
(27) The Presbyterians claim 1784 as the natal year of 
their church. When Dr. Schoepf was in Pittsburgh, as he 
relates, a German preacher was living there who ministered 
to all the Germans. (28) Arthur Lee, on the other hand, 
tells that there was not in Pittsburgh "a priest of any 
persuasion, nor church nor chapel; so they are likely to be 
damned without the benefit of clergy." (29) Mr. Lee 
probably did not know that the Presbyterian church was 



Port Pitt 5S 

in process of formation, and he may have closed his eyes 
to the fact that the German church had been in existence 
for two years, in order that he might elaborate his wit- 
ticism about being "damned without the benefit of clergy." 

John Wilkins, who removed from Carlisle to Pitts- 
burgh in October, 1783, and who subsequently became one 
of its leading citizens, being an associate justice of the com- 
mon pleas court of Allegheny County upon its erection, a 
chief burgess of the borough of Pittsburgh, and county 
treasurer for many years, has left a graphic, but rather 
dark account of the social and religious conditions prevail- 
ing in Pittsburgh at the time he settled there. (30) 

"When I first came here I found the place filled with 
old officers and soldiers, followers of the army, mixed with 
a few families of credit. All sorts of wickedness v/ere 
carried on to excess, and there was no appearance of mor- 
ality or regular order. * * * There appeared to be no 
signs of religion among the people, and it seemed to me 
that the Presbyterian ministers were afraid to come to the 
place lest they should be mocked or mistreated," 

He then relates that he had "often hinted to the cred- 
itable part of the people that something ought to be done 
toward establishing a Presbyterian church." The result of 
his suggestions was the organization of the Presbyterian 
church and a building was commenced at which he says he 
worked "with his own hands." 

The Episcopalians in Pittsburgh comprised only a 
small proportion of the population, but included some of 
the most prominent and influential citizens of the village. 
They were mainly emigrants from Virginia and Maryland, 
where the Episcopal, or Church of England as it was com- 
monly called, had been the state church, being disestab- 
lished during the Revolution. The church as a whole had 
fallen into disrepute, notwithstanding the fact that more 
than two-thirds of the signers of the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence were Episcopalians, the principal reason being 
that the majority of the clergy had remained Loyalists 
during the Revolution. But at this time the movement for 
the reorganization of the church on American lines was 
well under way. In September, 1785, a convention of dele- 
gates from New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Dela- 



U Fort Pitt 

ware, Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina had been 
held in Philadelphia and the Protestant Episcopal Church 
as a national body organized, and a provisional constitution 
adopted. On September 14, 1786, the Rev. Dr. William 
White, the rector of Christ Church and St. Peter's Church 
in Philadelphia, the friend of Washington, who had been 
chaplain of the Continental Congress, was elected Bishop 
of Pennsylvania, and on February 4th of the following year, 
he and the Rev. Dr. Samuel Provoost, Bishop-elect of New 
York, were consecrated in London by the Archbishops of 
Canterbury and York, and the Bishops of Both, Wells and 
Peterborough. And now the Episcopalians of Pittsburgh 
were looking forward to the formation of a church of their 
own, which, however, was not to be accomplished until 
many years afterward. 

All the Penns were devout Christians and John 
Penn, Jr., and John Penn, at this time the proprietarys of 
the manor and town of Pittsburgh, were not exceptions to 
their forebears. Regardless of how they were affected 
by the Revolution in which they were staunch Loyalists, 
they set aside land in Pittsburgh at the time their plan of 
the town was laid out, for all the religious denominations 
to which the residents of Pittsburgh belonged at least 
nominally, upon which to erect houses of worship. This 
land they donated to trustees for the use of the congrega- 
tions which had either been formed or were in process of 
formation. The first deed given for such purpose was to 
the German congregation and was dated June 18, 1787. 
Two other donations were made, both deeds for the same 
being dated September 24, 1787, the one being to the Presby- 
terian congregation, whose building had already been 
erected on the ground so conveyed, and the other being for 
the use of the Episcopalians; but for almost forty years 
after this land was conveyed to the Episcopalians it remained 
bare of a church building, being used solely as a burying 
ground. 

And the German church and the Presbyterian church 
were the pioneers in the reawakening of the religious life 
of Pittsburgh. The crudeness of the frontier was wearing 
off and the people yearned for a broader life, one of their 
desires being for a newspaper of their own. This new con- 



Fort Pitt 55 

dition coming to the ears of two adventurous young printers 
in Philadelphia, John Scull and Joseph Boyd, they deter- 
mined to meet it and establish a newspaper. The two 
men removed to Pittsburgh, bringing a printing outfit with 
them, and the Pittsburgh Gazette was born on July 29, 
1786, and was the first newspaper to be published in the 
entire Western country, and has had a continuous exist- 
ence to this day. The community was no longer isolated 
from the rest of the world. The paper mirrored the hap- 
penings in the Eastern parts of the United States and in 
Europe; and the only regret of the modern readers of the 
files of this old newspaper is the fact that the publishers 
did not deem it necessary to give publicity to local events. 
The people of Pittsburgh were now on the highroad to 
culture. 



REFERENCES. 
CHAPTER V. 

1. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madison, 
Wis., 1882, pp. 72-74. 

2. Reuben Gold Thwaites, LL. D. Revolution of the Upper Ohio, 
1775-1777, Madison, 1908, pp. 255-256. 

3. Reuben Gold Thwaites, LL. D. Frontier Defense on the Upper 
Ohio. Madison, 1912, p. 1. 

4. Ibid, pp. 249-252, pp. 293-294. 

5. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Advance on the Upper Ohio, 
1778-1779, Madison, 1916, p. 54. 

6. Ibid, p. 233. 

7. Ibid, p. 238. 

8. Ibid, p. 28. 

9. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Retreat on the Upper Ohio, 
Madison, 1917, p. 15. 

10. Ibid, pp. 376-382. 

11. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. XII, p. 133. 

12. Ibid, p. 190. 

13. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Supra, pp. 31-32. 

14. Ibid, p. 395. 

15. Ibid, p. 73. 

16. Ibid, pp. 73-74. 

17. Ibid, pp. 159-160. 

18. Ibid, pp. 139-140. 

19. Ibid, pp. 261-262. 

20. Ibid, p. 68. 



56 Fort Pitt 



21. Johann David Schoepf. Travels in the Confederation, (1783- 
1784), Philadelphia, 1911, Vol. I, pp. 241-290. 

22. Henry A. Muhlenberg. The Life of Major General Peter 
Muhlenberg, Philadelphia, 1849, pp. 425-430. 

23. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 40. 

24. Olden Time, Pittsburgh, 1848, Vol. II, p. 429. 

25. Richard Henry Lee. Life of Arthur Lee, LL.D., Boston, 1829, 
Vol. II, p. 380. 

Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 10, p, 391. 

26. Richard Henry Lee, Supra, p. 385. 

27. Carl August Voss. Gedenkschrift Zur Ein Hundert Fuenfund- 
zwanzig-Jaehrigen Jubel Feier, 1907, p. 13. 

28. Johann David Schoepf, Supra, p. 244. 

29. Richard Henry Lee, Supra, p. 385. 

30. Centennial Volume of the First Presbyterian Church of Pitts- 
burgh, Pa., 1784-1884, Pittsburgh, 1884, pp. 16-17. 



Fort Pitt 57 



CHAPTER VI. 
Last Days of Fort Pitt. 

The days of Fort Pitt's usefulness were over, although 
it remained a landmark for a number of years longer, and 
the Penns began to sell lots in the town of Pittsburgh. On 
November 27, 1779, by enactment of the Pennsylvania As- 
sembly, all the lands of the Penns in the state, except cer- 
tain manors, etc., which had been surveyed and returned to 
the land office prior to July 4, 1776, were forfeited to the 
Commonwealth, and they were granted as compensation, 
the sum of 130,000 pounds sterling. The manor of Pittsburgh 
in which Fort Pitt and the town of Pittsburgh were lo- 
cated, having been surveyed and returned to the land office 
in 1769, remained the property of the Penns. 

Neville B. Craig, in his. Life and Services of 
Isaac Craig, relates: (1) "The army being disbanded, it at 
once became necessary for these officers who had no for- 
tunes to retire upon, to embark in some business to sus- 
tain themselves, and to prevent the waste of what means 
they may have accumulated before the war." Accordingly 
Major Craig and Colonel Stephen Bayard, both of whom 
until recently, had been officers at Fort Pitt, formed a 
partnership to carry on the mercantile business, with the 
design to deal in lands and lots. Their first venture was 
to purchase from the Penns by agreement dated January 
22, 1784, "a certain tract of land lying and being in a point 
formed by the junction of the rivers Monongahela and Al- 
legheny, bounded on two sides by said rivers, and on the 
other two sides by the Fort and the ditch running to the 
Allegheny; supposed to contain about three acres." This 
was the first land sold in Pittsburgh. 

The Penns employed Colonel George Woods, an engi- 
neer residing in Bedford, to make a survey of the town and 
lay out a plan of the same, which was completed on May 
31st, and which embodied Colonel Campbell's plan of 1765. 
Thereafter by deed dated December 31, 1784, they con- 
veyed to Craig and Bayard thirty-two lots in the new plan, 
which included the land sold to them by agreement. These 



58 Fort Pitt 

thirty-two lots comprised all the lots between the Alle- 
gheny and Monongahela rivers, and Marbury and West 
streets, and included all the land occupied by Fort Pitt. 
While the deed was made to Major Isaac Craig and Colonel 
Stephen Bayard, they by a deed dated January 4, 1785, 
acknowledged that the purchase had been made on their 
own account and for the account of John Holker, William 
Turnbull and Peter Marmie of Philadelphia, they having 
entered into partnership with those gentlemen in June, 
1784. These five men comprised the firm of Turnbull, 
Marmie and Company, formed to engage in various enter- 
prises in Pittsburgh, including dealing in real estate and 
operating a distillery; (2) and later they also applied for 
a license to trade with the Indians. (3) At subsequent 
dates they added to their enterprises a sawmill up the Al- 
legheny River and a salt works on the Big Beaver. 

Fort Pitt had been in possession of the Continental 
Congress since General Hand was placed in charge on June 
1, 1777, but for some years the garrison had been dwindling 
in numbers. In 1784, it consisted of a lieutenant and 
twenty-five men. (4) It was at this time that Major Craig 
and Colonel Bayard made a claim to the land on which the 
fort was located. In a letter of Major Craig dated July 25, 
1784, Craig and Bayard made a request to use some of the 
buildings, their request being refused, both by Captain 
Marbury and by his successor. Lieutenant Lucket. That 
Craig and Bayard fully expected to obtain possession of Fort 
Pitt at this time, is evident from the fact that the materials 
for the erection of the distillery which they expected to 
establish, had already been ordered, Craig stating in this 
letter that on the refusal of the officers at Fort Pitt to allow 
him to occupy any of the buildings, he had provided a house 
for their reception when they arrived. (5) 

In 1785, there were at the fort, only the commander, 
Lucket, now risen to the rank of captain, and six men, 
whose duty seemed to be to guard military pris- 
oners awaiting trial. (6) An incident occurred 
at this time which created considerable excitement 



Fort Pitt 59 

in Pittsburgh. On May 11, 1785, a Delaware Indian 
named Mamachtaga, while intoxicated, killed a white man 
and wounded three others on the north side of the Alle- 
gheny River opposite Pittsburgh- (7) He was apprehended 
and taken to Fort Pitt and confined in the dungeon. The 
feeling of the whites against the Indian was strong. They 
were particularly incensed against Hugh Henry Bracken- 
ridge, the leading lawyer of Pittsburgh, who was to appear 
for the Indian, and against Joseph Nicholas, the interpreter, 
who had been with Brackenridge in his interview with 
Mamachtaga. They proposed to hang the interpreter and 
exact an oath from Brackenridge not to appear at the trial. 
It was, however, finally decided to go to the garrison and 
demand the surrender of the Indian. Two attempts were 
then made by parties of Washington County militia, Wash- 
ington County then extending to the south side of the 
Monongahela River opposite Pittsburgh, to take the Indian 
out of the custody of the military and tomahawk him. In 
their first effort the militia took possession of the garrison, 
but were persuaded by Captain Lucket, to retire, which 
they did, firing their guns as they passed through the town. 
The next attempt was made two days later when they made 
a prisoner of Captain Lucket and were marching him off, 
when, through a hastily organized party of Pittsburgh citi- 
zens and five or six soldiers, they were overpowered, and the 
prisoner released, and several of the militia taken into 
custody. Thereupon Colonel Harmar sent Captain McCurdy 
with a number of soldiers to reinforce the garrison. 

Major Michael Huffnagle, a justice of the peace of 
Westmoreland County, reported the occurrence to John 
Armstrong, the Secretary of the Council, and closed his 
communication as follows: "I wish for a special commis- 
sion to be sent for the trial of the prisoner at this place, 
and a "blank death warrant." To the honor of the Council, 
however, it should be remembered that they were 
not as complaisant as Major Huffnagle imagined they 
would be, and did not send a blank death war- 
rant, but waited until the Indian had been tried and found 
guilty, the trial taking place at Hannastown, when on No- 
vember 25, 1785, a warrant was directed to be issued, 
whereupon Mamachtaga was duly hanged. (8) 



60 Fort Pitt 

Now Craig and Bayard instituted legal proceedings by 
bringing a suit in ejectment against Captain Lucket for 
the possession of the fort. The commander, however, was 
not to be intimidated by the service of a Pennsylvania writ, 
and declared that he would remain at his post until he had 
received orders from Congress to surrender the possession. 
(9) 

That the fort was to be given up by the United States 
was generally understood in Pittsburgh. The state of 
Pennsylvania claimed that the effects purchased by Wil- 
liam Thompson and Alexander Ross from Captain Edmon- 
stone now belonged to Alexander Ross who had been at- 
tained of treason during the Revolution, and it made prep- 
arations to sell them. Major Huffnagle, who in addition to 
being a justice of the peace, was one of the agents for the 
sale of confiscated estates in Westmoreland County, (10) 
on May 6, 1785, wrote to Secretary John Armstrong in re- 
gard to the proposed sale. He reported that the greater 
part of the property purchased by Alexander Ross and 
William Thompson from Captain Edmonstone, had re- 
mained in the fort and had been made use of, and inquired 
how to proceed * * *. He also stated that in his opinion 
it would be necessary to have an order from Congress that 
possession be given to such person or persons as Council 
should direct. (11) 

In accordance with the suggestion of Major Huffnagle, 
John Dickenson, the President of Pennsylvania, wrote on 
June 28th to the Pennsylvania delegates in Congress ask- 
ing them to obtain from Congress directions to the com- 
manding officer at Fort Pitt, upon its abandonment by Con- 
gress, to deliver the possession to John Ormsby, Michael 
Huffnagle, John Proctor, Thomas Galbraith and Robert 
Galbraith, citizens of Pennsylvania. (12) 

General Arthur St. Clair, learning of the matter, ad- 
dressed a letter to President Dickenson, on July 16, 1785, 
in which he complained of the contemplated sale, and 
claimed that no part of the buildings left standing on the 
evacuation of Fort Pitt by the British belonged to Ross- 
Part of them, he said, belonged to him and part to other 
persons. (3) In compliance with this request the Council 
on July 11th, ordered the sale to be postponed until further 



Fort Pitt 61 

order of Council. (14) 

Turnbull, Marmie and Company, in addition to the 
ejectment brought by Craig and Bayard for the land on 
which Fort Pitt was erected, had also presented a 
memorial to Congress setting forth their claims and asking 
that they be given possession. (15) To the letter of Presi- 
dent Dickenson, Charles Pettit, a Pennsylvania delegate to 
Congress, (16) replied in a communication dated August 
12, 1785. He stated that he believed the garrison would 
shortly be removed, and said, "as it is understood that pos- 
session of the fort was taken on behalf of the United States 
without any treaty or contract, it seems to be the intention 
of Congress to relinquish it in the same manner." He 
added, "I have therefore advised Turnbull, Marmie and 
Company to make their application to your Excellency and 
the Council on the subject." On August 15, 1785, Presi- 
dent Dickenson addressed a letter to the commissioners 
appointed to take possession of Fort Pitt upon its relin- 
quishment by Congress, in which he stated, that as it was 
probable that the United States would soon relinquish the 
possession of Fort Pitt, which he called "Pittsburgh," he 
thought it proper to direct, that upon such relinquishment, 
they should take possession in the name and behalf of this 
Commonwealth, and that the possession taken should be 
without prejudice to private property rights. (17) 

It was some time after August 15th that Turnbull, 
Marmie and Company received possession of a portion of 
Fort Pitt, a small garrison being maintained there for some 
years longer. In 1786, the garrison consisted of twelve 
men. Doctor Hildreth, of Marietta, Ohio, who passed 
through Pittsburgh as late as April, 1788, related that 
there was still "a small garrison of troops at Fort Pitt." 
Major Ebenezer Denny, writing on July 10, 1791, stated 
that he found two battalions of levies at Fort Pitt. (18) 

Colonel John May of Boston, a former Revolutionary 
officer, was in Pittsburgh from May 7th to May 24th, 1788. 
(19) He stopped at the tavern of Marcus Hulings on the 
south side of the Monongahela River, in Washington 
County, opposite the foot of Liberty Street, and directly 
across the river from Fort Pitt, because, as he complains, 
the same lodgings would have cost him in Pittsburgh seven 



62 Fort Pitt 

times as much as Hulings charged, and added, "Such is the 
odds between the counties of Westmoreland and Washing- 
ton. 

"Pittsburgh is in plain sight," he continued, "at half 
a mile distance. It is an irregular, poorly built place. The 
number of houses, mostly built of logs, about one hundred 
and fifty. The inhabitants (perhaps because they lead too 
easy a life) incline to be extravagant and lazy. They are 
subject, however, to frequent alarms from the savages of 
the wilderness. The situation is agreeable and the soil 
good." 

He tells that Hulings informed him that more than 
two hundred and fifty boats of twenty to thirty tons filled 
with people, live stock and furniture had passed the place 
since early spring, going down the river, the destination 
being to the settlements farther south and west- He records 
that General Harmar called on him, crossing the river in a 
barge called the Congress, rowed by twelve men in white 
uniforms and caps, and took him to the north side of the 
Allegheny River where they visited some Indian graves 
at the head of which tall poles were fixed daubed with red. 
Later General Harmar also took him up the Monongahela 
River where they visited Braddock's field. Of this he said, 
"The bones of the slain are plenty on the ground 
at this day. I picked up many of them which did not seem 
much decayed." 

The constantly rising tide of immigration into Western 
Pennsylvania required more subdivisions of territory. 
Westmoreland County had been reduced on March 28, 1781, 
by the creation of Washington County, and was further re- 
duced by the erection of Fayette County on September 26, 
1783, but was still inordinately large, and on September 
24, 1788, Allegheny County was formed out of Westmore- 
land and Washington counties, and the county seat located 
at Pittsburgh; and the village assumed a new importance. 

In 1790, John Pope undertook a journey from Rich- 
mond to Kentucky and the region farther south, stopping 
on the way at Pittsburgh. In October he had crossed the 
Alleghany Mountains. He relates: "I passed through the 
shadow of Death — saw George Washington's intrenchments 
at the Meadows, and undismayed rode over Braddock's 



Q 



O 



:^ ^ 







«2 


5- 


<S 


s 


b (w 


a 


sr 


S 


^^ 




S 


t^ 


1— ' 



;^ 



Oq 




Fort Pitt 63 

grave." (20) While in Pittsburgh he made the acquaint- 
ance of Hugh Henry Brackenridge and he has much to say- 
about that gentleman's recent marriage to the daughter 
of a German farmer. He even writes verses on the event. 
He tells that the lady whom Brackenridge married was 
named Wolfe, and that after the marriage Brackenridge 
sent her to a school in Philadelphia, where "she now is 
under the governance of a reputable female, whose business 
will be to polish the manners, and wipe off the rusticities 
which Mrs. Brackenridge had acquired whilst a Wolfe." 
He tells lof viewing Fort Pitt and the neighboring eminences 
in company with Brackenridge, and says the fort "will one 
day or other employ the historic pen, as being replete with 
strange and melancholy events." His characterization of 
the people of Pittsburgh is the reverse of flattering. "The 
town at present is inhabited, with only some few excep- 
tions, by mortals who act as if possessed of a charter of 
exclusive privilege to filch from, annoy and harrass their 
fellow creatures, particularly the incautious; many of 
whom have emigrated from various parts to Kentucky and 
can verify this charge — Goods of every description are 
dearer in Pittsburgh than in Kentucky," and he places the 
blame on the former Revolutionary officers who conducted 
the mercantile establishments, by adding, "which I at- 
tribute to a combination of pensioned scoundrels who infest 
the place." 

Neville B. Craig relates in his life of his father, that 
Colonel Bayard withdrew from the firm ot Turnbull, 
Marmie and Company in the spring of 1788, and that his 
father. Major Isaac Craig, left it in October, 1789. (2) 
The deed by which Major Craig conveyed his interest in 
the lots purchased from the Penns, which was made to 
William Turnbull and John Holker, two of the partners in 
the firm of Turnbull, Marmie and Company, is, however, 
dated September 8, 1795. 

In February, 1791, Major Craig was appointed Quar- 
termaster and Military Storekeeper at Pittsburgh, (22) 
and while holding this office wrote a number of letters to 
his military superiors which throw some light on condi- 
tions at Fort Pitt. His letter of March 25, 1791, is of more 
than usual interest, "In consequence of a number of 



64 Fort Pitt 

people killed and several taken prisoners by the Indians in 
the vicinity of this place, within a few days past," he 
writes, "and frequent reports of large parties of savages 
being on our frontier, the people of this town have made 
frequent applications for arms and ammunition to me, and 
I have been forced to lend them one hundred muskets and 
bayonets and cartouch boxes." 

The two following letters show that Turnbull, Marmie 
and Company were still excluded from a portion of Fort 
Pitt, and indicate that while Major Craig retained an in- 
terest in the land purchased from the Penns, he was no 
longer on friendly terms with his old partners. The first 
letter is dated May 12, 1791, and in it he says, "Turnbull 
and Marmie are now in this country and have directed their 
lawyers to prosecute their ejectments in the Supreme Court 
— they are confident of being put in possession of the fort 
by the sheriff." The other letter is dated October 6, 1791, 
and in this Craig complains: "Turnbull and Marmie con- 
tinue to pull down and sell the materials of the fort, and 
have lately been so ill-natured as to institute a suit against 
me for pointing out a piece of ground between the fort 
and the Allegheny River to Captain Buel for encampment." 

In the next letter the requiem of Fort Pitt is sung. 
The new fort farther up the Allegheny River had been com- 
pleted and the garrison was withdrawn from Fort Pitt and 
on May 13, 1792, Major Craig wrote to General Henry 
Knox, the Secretary of War: "Captain Hughes, with his 
detachment has occupied the barracks of the new fort since 
the 5th instant * * * the works, if you have no objection, 
I shall name Fort LaFayette." (23) 

REFERENCES. 

CHAPTER VI. 

1. Neville B. Craig, Sketch of the lAfe and Services of Isaac Craig, 
Pittsburgh, 1854, pp. 50-51. 

2. Ibid, pp. 51-52. 

3. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 521. 

4. Richard Henry Lee. Life of Arthur Lee, LL. D., Boston, 1829, 
Vol. II, p. 387. 

5. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
p. 182. 

6. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. 10, p. 464-467. 

7. Ibid, pp. 464-467. 

Archibald Loudon, Indian Narratives, Carlisle, 1808, pp. 38-50. 



Fort Pitt 65 

8. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 585. 
Archibald Loudon, Supra, p. 50. 

9. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, p. 468. 

10. Colonial Records, Vol. 13, p. 774. 

11. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol X, p. 462. 

12. Ibid, pp. 477-478. 

13. Ibid, p. 483. 

14. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 498. 

15. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 497. 

16. Colonial Records, Vol. 14, p. 549. 
Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, pp. 462-464. 

17. Pennsylvania Archives, Supra, p. 498. 

18. Military Journal of Major Ebenezer Demiy, Philadelphia, 1859. 
p. 152. 

19. Journal and Letters of Col. John May, of Boston, Cincinnati, 
1873, pp. 33-49. 

20. John Pope. A Tour Through the Southern and Western Terri- 
tories of the United States, Richmond, MDCCXCII, pp. 14-17. 

21. Neville B. Graig, Sketch of the Life and Services' of Isaac 
Craig, Surpa. p. 54. 

22. Historical Register. Harrisburg, 1883, Vol. I, pp. 292-304. 

23. Ibid, 1884, Vol. II, p. 123. 



66 Fort Pitt 



CHAPTER VII. 
THE OLD REDOUBT. 

I. 
Location and Date of Erection. 

The only relic of Fort Pitt remaining in Pittsburgh to- 
day is the Old Redoubt, also known as the Block House, 
situated at the Point. It is the oldest building in Pitts- 
burgh, and next to Trinity Churchyard, the oldest land- 
mark in the city. It is a place of great interest, not only 
locally, but to students of history all over the country. That 
it was connected with Fort Pitt is beyond question, yet the 
claim has been made that it was part of Fort Duquesne. 
Russell Smith, the artist, who studied his art in this city, 
was guilty of this error. In 1832 he made a sketch of the 
Redoubt, and of the Powder Magazine of Fort Pitt which, 
until sometime prior to 1844, stood on the northerly side of 
Liberty Street about midway between Marbury and Water 
streets. In The Pittsburgh Dispatch of Sunday, January 
11, 1885, cuts of these sketches were published, along with 
others of local interest, together with the statement that 
the artist had presented the originals to the Historical So- 
ciety of Western Pennsylvania on the preceding Thursday. 
In these cuts the Redoubt, as well as the Powder Magazine, 
are represented as having been part of Fort Duquesne. The 
date on the tablet on the Redoubt is given as 1755, which 
would bring it within the period of the French occupation; 
and Colonel Bouquet's name is omitted. Today unfortun- 
ately the whereabouts lof these two sketches are not known. 
However, subsequent to the date of the sketches, paintings 
were made from them by the artist, that of the Redoubt 
being now in the possession of the Historical Society of 
Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, a copy being printed in John 
Martin Hammond's, "Quaint and Historic Forts of North 
America," and an engraving of the painting of the Powder 
Magazine having been published in Gody's Magazine And La- 
dy's Book, for September, 1844. 

A writer in Watson's Annals who saw the Redoubt in 



Fort Pitt 67 

1804, (1) and to whom it was known as the Guard House, 
also credits it as belonging to Fort Duquesne. 

Attached to the bill of sale by which Captain Edmon- 
stone sold certain property, being part of Fort Pitt, to Wil- 
liam Thompson and Alexander Ross, was a schedule of 
items, one of which was for "two redoubts." Nothing is 
said about any blockhouses, except "a square log house 
fifty feet long." (2) General Irvine in 1782, complained of 
trespassers on the fort. He tells of Major Edward Ward 
having a house in the King's Orchard which was formerly 
a redoubt and had been removed from its orginial location 
and taken there and "built house fashion." (3) He com- 
plains further, about "Irwin's house" and states that this 
was also formerly a redoubt, "but is now environed by the 
other houses of the town of Pittsburgh." This Irwin was un- 
doubtedly, Captain John Irwin, who was at the time deputy 
commissary-general of issues. (4) Here there are two re- 
doubts accounted for. Ward's could hardly have been the 
Old Redoubt, as it was located in the King's Orchard, and 
the Redoubt still standing, must therefore have been the 
one occupied by Captain Irwin. 

The Old Redoubt is located one hundred and fifteen 
feet north of Penn Street and six hundred and sixty-seven 
feet west of Marbury Street. It is a five-sided structure, 
the side facing the city being twenty-three feet in width; 
the two sides at right angles with the front, as well as the 
two rear angling sides being each about sixteen feet. It 
has a stone foundation standing about five and a half feet 
above the level of the ground; the upper part of the build- 
ing which is about eight and a half feet in height, is 
constructed of brick. It has two ranges of loop holes for 
musketry cut into sticks of timber which are let into the 
walls on every side of the building and are a foot thick, one 
row being placed a short distance below the roof and the 
other immediately above the foundation. In the easterly 
front facing the city, immediately under the eaves, is a 
stone tablet bearing the following inscription: 

"A. D. 1764 
COLL. BOUQUET." 

The whole is surmounted by a high sloping roof covered 



68 Fort Pitt 

by wooden shingles. 

Since March 15, 1894, the old relic has been the prop- 
erty of the Daughters of the American Revolution, having 
been conveyed to that organization by Mrs. Mary E- 
Schenley who had been the owner for many years, having 
inherited it, together with the entire block bounded by 
Penn Street, Duquesne Way, Marbury and Water streets, 
from her grandfather. Colonel James O'Hara. Turnbull, Mar- 
mie and Company having acquired the land on which Fort 
Pitt stood, probably obtained possession of the Redoubt be- 
fore securing control of the rest of the fort, as Neville B. 
Craig says Turnbull, Marmie and Company built an addition 
to it in 1785, with bricks taken from the walls of the fort, 
thus constituting a dwelling house. He also tells that this 
was occupied by Mr. Turnbull for a year, and by his father 
for the three following years, and that he was born there 
in 1787. (5) 

There is no evidence that either Mr. Holker or Mr. 
Marmie ever resided in Pittsburgh, but Mr. Turnbull for a 
number of years after he removed from the Redoubt, lived 
in a stone house on Second Street, now Second Avenue, 
west of Market Street. He was a prominent citizen and 
was noted for the lavish manner of his entertainments. 
Major Samuel S. Forman of New Jersey was in Pitts- 
burgh in the latter part of November, 1789, accompanying 
his uncle. General David Forman and his family, who with 
a large number of negro slaves were on their way to settle 
in the Natchez country, then under Spanish authority. He 
records in his diary about the party being entertained by 
Mr. Turnbull, "late of Philadelphia," whom he calls Colonel 
Turnbull. He tells of an "elegant" dinner given in their 
honor by Mr. Turnbull which was attended by several Pitts- 
burgh gentlemen, and that the Pittsburghers accompanied 
them to the boat as they left Pittsburgh. (6) 

For perhaps tv/o score years the Redoubt was the hab- 
itation of refined and cultured people. In 1831, according 
to The Pittsburgh Gazette of August 19th, of that year, it 
was occupied by a French engineer, presumably Jean Bar- 
beau, who with Lewis Keyon had made a plan of Pittsburgh 
which was published the year before. After the engineer 
left the Redoubt, it was allowed to become dilapidated, grow- 



Fort Pitt 69 

ing more shabby with each passing year until it became 
the property of the Daughters of the American Revolution. 
This organization tore down the addition and restored the 
Redoubt to its original state. 

The histories of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, 
where they refer to the Redoubt at all, state almost unan- 
imously that it was located outside of the fort, and a short 
distance west of it. In the light of the latest investigation, 
however, it appears beyond question that it was really a 
part of the old stronghold and most likely stood on the 
north bastion. To William McConway of this city, belongs 
the credit of calling attention to this fact and causing an 
investigation to be made. 

Mr. McConway has long been interested in the early 
history of Pittsburgh, and particularly in that of the old 
fort at the Point. He made himself thoroughly familiar 
with the published accounts, and when doubt arose in his 
mind of their correctness, he examined the matter for him- 
self. He knew of the existence of Lieutenant Ratzer's plan 
of the fort, and in the year 1909, he sent to London and 
had a copy made of it, and from his knowledge of the sub- 
ject and a study of this plan reached the conclusion that 
the Redoubt was not located outside of the fort, but was 
part of the structure itself, and that it stood on the north 
bastion. 

That Mr. McConway's copy of Ratzer's plan is an 
exact reproduction of the plan of Fort Pitt as preserved in 
the Crown Collection of Maps and Manuscripts in the British 
Museum, is apparent from a careful comparison, with the 
copy of Ratzer's plan as published in 1905 by The A. H. 
Clark Company of Cleveland. The writer became im- 
pressed by Mr. McConway's conclusion and made an inde- 
pendent investigation, becoming so deeply interested that 
he studied the entire history of Fort Pitt, the result being 
this monograph. 

The Redoubt is said to have been the headquarters of 
Colonel Henry Bouquet while at Fort Pitt and to have 
been erected by him in 1764. (7) In his day Bouquet was 
the most prominent figure in the British army in the West. 
He was at the junction of the Ohio and Monongahela rivers 
many times, and was there several times during the period 



10 Fort Pitt 

from 1763 to and including 1764. There is no record of 
the date on which he left Fort Pitt at the conclusion of the 
Kiyasuta and Pontiac War, but it was no doubt before the 
end of 1763. When the Indians became troublesome again 
the next year, he was in Philadelphia, (8) and from there 
was summoned to lead an army against the Indians on the 
Muskingum River, as has already appeared- On September 
17, 1764, he arrived at Fort Pitt preparatory to entering 
upon this campaign on which he started on October 3rd, 
returning to Fort Pitt at its conclusion on November 28, 
1764. The regular troops were immediately sent to garri- 
son the different posts farther East, and the Provincials 
to their homes, Bouquet proceeding to Philadelphia, where 
he arrived early in January, 1765. (9) If the Redoubt was 
erected in 1764 by Colonel Bouquet, it must have been 
sometime between September 17th and the end of that 
year. 

History has demonstrated that Colonel Bouquet was 
the best Indian fighter who up to his time had engaged in 
Indian warfare. Is it likely that such a seasoned cam- 
paigner so soon after having driven the besieging Indians 
of Kiyasuta and Pontiac from Fort Pitt, and having met 
the Muskingum Indians and forced them into making a 
lasting peace, would erect a building outside of the fort as 
his headquarters, or for any other purpose? Not even the 
merest tyro in military affairs would be guilty of such a 
violation of military science. Nor would an experienced 
military officer erect a redoubt between two bas- 
tions, the Redoubt being close to the north bastion 
and between that and the south bastion. Also 
would a Redoubt be erected in this location with loop holes 
facing in the direction of the fort, from which the enemy, 
if it captured the building, could fire on the fort? The fact 
that the Redoubt was loop-holed on all sides would indicate 
that it stood above the level of the rest of the fort, and 
that the purpose of the loop-holes was to enable the occu- 
pants to fire over the fort in all directions. 

Zadok Cramer, Pittsburgh's first publisher, in his Navi- 
gator for 1808, writing of the ruins of Fort Pitt as they 
appeared at that time, says * * * "within the embankment 
are still some of its barracks and a strong stone powder 



Fort Pitt 71 

magazine, the only remains of the British buildings-" 
Nothing is said of any remnant of the fort being located 
outside of the fort. In the article on the Redoubt already 
referred to, published in The Pittsburgh Gazette of August 
19, 1831, of which paper Neville B. Craig was the proprietor 
and editor, no claim is made that the Redoubt was located 
outside of the fort. This statement was not made until 
more than a decade later. In 1830, the Honorable Richard 
Biddle of Pittsburgh procured a copy of Lieutenant Ratz- 
er's plan of Fort Pitt. This came into the possession of 
Neville B. Craig and his son, Isaac Craig, then twenty 
years of age. The two men published articles on the sub- 
ject of the fort and the Redoubt in the American Pioneer 
of June, 1842, a monthly publication emanating from Cin- 
cinnati. (10) The article written by Isaac Craig was illus- 
trated with Biddle's copy of Ratzer's plan, and on this sev- 
eral of the present streets were located. On this plan the 
Redoubt appears outside of the fort and just west of the 
north bastion and beyond the moat. In his description of 
the Redoubt, Neville B. Craig also states that it was located 
"on the outside of the ditch of the fort." 

The descriptions of Fort Pitt and of the Redoubt as 
they were printed in these two articles, including the map, 
were followed in 1869 by A. G. Haumann, who drew and 
published a plan of Pittsburgh as it was supposed to be in 
1795. In this plan even the mistake made in Ratzer's 
name was followed, being given as "R." Ratzer instead of 
"B." Ratzer, and the gardens as laid out by Ratzer east 
of the fort, were omitted. Haumann's plan with only 
slight variations has been republished many times since 
1869, and has always been given out as if it were an orig- 
inal picture of Pittsburgh, instead of having been labori- 
ously built up, mostly from data obtained from Neville B. 
Craig's History of Pittsburgh. The Craig articles and the 
Haumann plan have been religiously followed by all subse- 
quent historians, except only by George H. Thurston, who 
said the Redoubt was erected within the fort. (11) 

Neville B. Craig will always remain Pittsburgh's most 
eminent historian. To him the city is indebted for the 
preservation of much of the material relating to the early 
history of this community, and he is quoted oftener than 



72 Fort Pitt 

any other writer on the subject, yet he must be charged 
with error, unimportant though it may be, in approving 
the placing of the Redoubt outside of Fort Pitt. As Rat- 
zer's plan, made in 1761, could not have had on it the Re- 
doubt which is supposed to have been built at a later date, 
nor the Pittsburgh streets which came into existence in 
still more recent times, the question is, were these land- 
marks placed on the plan by Biddle or by Isaac Craig, with 
whose article the plan was published. The inference is, 
from a careful reading of the article, that the Redoubt, 
as well as the streets, were placed there by Isaac Craig 
with the approval by his father, Neville B. Craig. 

No authority is given for placing the Redoubt outside 
of the fort and it must have been done, either because of 
a wrong construction of the plan, as for instance that the 
sally port of the fort led in the direction of the spot where 
the Redoubt was placed, or by reason of a mistaken recol- 
lection of Neville B. Craig of something which he had heard 
many years before. 

The plan as published by Isaac Craig gives the scale 
as three hundred feet to the inch- Measuring from Mar- 
bury Street, the distance to the Redoubt is about nine hun- 
dred feet, while the actual distance as appears by the sur- 
vey in the Deed Registry Office of the City of Pittsburgh, 
is six hundred and sixty-seven feet. The distance from 
Marbury Street as placed by Mr. McConway on the copy 
of the plan procured by him in London, to the center of 
the north bastion of the fort, is six hundred and sixty feet, 
which closely approximates the distance from Marbury 
Street to the location of the Redoubt as appears by the 
records in the Deed Registry Office of Pittsburgh. Any 
variation in the distance can be easily accounted for by 
the fact that the line of Marbury Street as placed by Mr. 
McConway, in conjunction with the fort, may be slightly 
different from Marbury Street as located on the ground. 
From this it would appear that Mr. McConway is right in 
assuming that the Redoubt stood on the north bastion of 
the fort. 

That the bastions of the fort were above the level of 
the remainder of the fort is beyond doubt. The profile 
attached to Ratzer's plan shows the highest part of the 








00 ^ 



>, p-t 



M 



03 


o 


a 


w 


O 












►-S 


^ 



% ^ 



o 



Fort Pitt 73 

fort to have been the parapet, which was about fifteen feet 
above the ground. This fact will not change the contention 
that the Redoubt was on the bastion, the bastion being 
merely an extension of the parapet. The contour of the 
ground at the Point has been much changed since Fort 
Pitt was erected. At that time the ground was low, and 
was subject to overflow from the Allegheny River. John 
McKinney in his description of Fort Duquesne, where he 
was a prisoner in February, 1756, said, "the waters some- 
times rise so high that the whole fort is surrounded with 
it, so that canoes can go around it." (12) In many places 
the distance from Penn Street to the ground subject to 
overflow did not exceed one hundred and fifty feet and 
nowhere two hundred and fifty feet. (13) As late as 1807, 
Zadok Cramer, writing about the former location of Fort 
Pitt, stated that on part of the ground there stood a large 
brewery and two dwellings, and added, "the situ- 
ation is too low for general building." (14) The 
brewery referred to was the Point Brewery, then 
conducted by Colonel O'Hara. The writer in 
Watson's Annals speaking of this brewery, (15) 
said, "a part of the brew-house premises fills the 
place which was a bastion. At a little distance from it 
there is still a small brick five-sided edifice called the Guard- 
House, erected by the British after the capture from the 
French." This was the Redoubt. There is in existence an 
old plan of Pittsburgh made in 1805, by William Masson 
(15a) and owned by Mr. Joseph B. Shea of this city, on which 
the names of the owners of the property are given, 
(mainly those of the grantees of the Penns) and on 
which pictures of a few of the more prominent buildings ap- 
pear. Twenty or thirty feet north of Penn Street and about 
seven hundred feet west of Marbury Street, there is shown 
the brewery, a large, two'story structure surmounted by a 
belfry. It was the north bastion that was located north of 
this part of Penn Street, and it was the easterly end of the 
brewery which stood on the site of the bastion, if the writer 
in Watson's Annals was correct in his statement. Brewery 
Alley was laid out easterly of the rear line of the brewery 
and led to it. It was a narrow alley nine feet in width 
running parallel with Penn Street and about ninety-eight 



74 Fort Pitt 

feet north of it. Eight feet north of the location of this 
alley is the Redoubt. 

The depth of the lots in Wood's plan which ran to the 
Allegheny River, is given as four hundred and ten feet. 
Therefore from one hundred and sixty to two hundred and 
sixty feet must have been the lowlands which overflowed. 
Since that day there have been great changes in the contour 
of the ground, it having been raised from eight to seventeen 
feet. A number of excavations have been made and tim- 
bers of the old fort uncovered, buried from twelve to fifteen 
feet underground. The width of the ground between Penn 
Street and the Allegheny River has not only been widened 
to four hundred and ten feet, but the Penn Street lots have 
been increased to a depth of four hundred and twenty feet. 
In 1836, two acts of the Assembly were passed authorizing 
the councils of the City of Pittsburgh to lay out Duquesne 
Way at not less than four hundred and twenty feet north of 
Penn Street and to establish a grade for the same and to fill 
up the ground. In pursuance of this authority, in 1839, 
councils laid out Duquesne Way and it was entirely outside 
of Wood's plan and ten feet beyond Wood's line; and the 
land at the Point now extends several hundred feet beyond 
even Duquesne Way. The north bastion was no doubt 
built on the ground subject to overflow and was fifteen feet 
or more above the then level of the ground. If the level of 
the ground at this place has been raised only ten or twelve 
feet, what is more reasonable than that the Redoubt, the 
foundation of which is something over five feet above the 
present level of the ground, might have been part of the 
north bastion of the fort ? 

That the north bastion was the most important part 
of the fort was apparent to military eyes, there can be no 
doubt. It was the nearest point to the Allegheny River. 
Across that stream all was Indian country, and from there 
the attack would occur if at all. This was made plain by 
General Irvine while commanding here. In December, 
1781, when there was talk of abandoning Fort Pitt and 
building a new fort at the mouth of Chartiers Creek, he 
wrote that in such case all of the fort but the north bastion 
should be destroyed, and on this there should be placed a 
strong blockhouse. (16) The belief that there were Re- 



Fort Pitt 75 

doubts on the bastions is strengthened, when it is borne 
in mind that the word Redoubt and Block House, then as 
now, were used interchangeably, and that Neville B. Craig 
says there were two or three block houses on the bastions, 
(17) which undoubtedly meant that they were what we 
know as redoubts. Nor is it certain that the building was 
erected in 1764. It is more likely that it was built with 
the fort and that the tablet with the date was placed in 
the structure to commemorate the fact that it was occupied 
by Colonel Bouquet in 1764. 

There are extant two views of early Pittsburgh, the 
first being that made by Lewis Brantz, the young German, 
who was in Pittsburgh in 1785, as has already been re- 
lated, and who was there a second time in 1790, the pic- 
ture bearing that date. This shows that the ground about 
Fort Pitt was quite low. The fort is seen, and surmounting 
the easterly side are two small stack-like projections, 
which are undoubtedly redoubts, one being on what was 
apparently intended to represent the north bastion and the 
other standing on what seems to be the east bastion. 
Brantz Mayer, the biographer of Lewis Brantz, tells of 
the remarkable accuracy which the artist displayed in this 
picture. "Every house at the fort is minutely delineated 
* * * and forty-five years afterward I saw him point out 
every place of historical interest in a landscape which art 
and trade has so transformed." (18) 

The other view of Pittsburgh is the one appearing in 
the book of General Henri Victor Collot, a French army 
officer, who was in Pittsburgh in 1796, having been sent 
out by the French government at the request of M. Adet, 
the French Minister to the United States, for the purpose 
of obtaining minute details of the political, commercial 
and military state of the western part of the continent. 
(19) In this picture also a structure is seen which appears 
to be the fort and here there are redoubt-like buildings 
rising above the main structure. The fort of course, had 
been abandond at this time, but Collot said "one still sees 
the remains of it. It is a regular pentagon of which today 
the parapets have fallen into the moat, and it is neither 
surrounded nor covered, either by stone or by palisades, 
and it is open on all sides." 



76 Fort Pitt 



II. 
In Later Days. 

The Redoubt was acquired by new owners, going early 
into the hands of Colonel O'Hara. It was rented to tenants, 
became surrounded by manufacturing establishments, and 
the character of the tenants changed from year to year 
and the building deteriorated. W. G. Lyford has left an 
extended account of the Redoubt as he saw it in 1837- (20) 
"A part of this fort, however, so far as houses constitute 
a part, must yet be remaining; or a block house and 
officers' quarters must have been erected on or near the 
same spot, soon after the period last mentioned; for such 
buildings exist — they are of brick and two stories high ; the 
former low pitched, adjoin each other, and carry in their 
appearance everything of a military feature. The heavy 
timbers, in which the loop-holes are mortised, are on the 
side next the city, about half the height of the building, 
and probably serve at this time to support the floor of the 
second story. 

"I asked permission of the occupant, a pleasant looking 
German, whose name is John Martin, to enter his citadel, 
which he readily granted, and found the lower room taste- 
fully finished and furnished; but he could give me no 
further information, than that he had a lease on it at $40 
a year. I suggested to him the advantage he might derive, 
by opening the room (which is about 20 feet square), dur- 
ing the season of travel, for the accommodation of 
strangers, and have in preparation some light cakes, lem- 
onade, ices, fruits, etc., for that numbers would be pleased 
to visit the military relic, if they could do so under circum- 
stances other than intrusive, and while he obliged such, he 
would profit liberally by the pleasant speculation. His wife 
just at this moment entered the room, laughing, from an 
adjoining shed, and wiping her arms (for she appeared to 
have been washing) said, 'Dare Jon, didn't I tell de so, 
of den? hear vat de man sa.' John laughed likewise, and. 
replied, *ah, Fms doo old now; and pesides, yoo nose I cot 
vork petter dan dat.' 




The Old Redoubt in 1843. 

From Day's "Historical Collections of the State of Pennsylvania." 




The Old Redoubt in 1893. 



Fort Pitt 77 

"These buildings are located in the midst of lumber 
yards and workshops, very near the point at which the 
two rivers unite; but as it is difficult finding them, from 
the nature of the materials with which they are sur- 
rounded, some of which appear as ancient as the edifices 
themselves, it is probable that few other of the inhabitants 
are acquainted with their existence than those whose vo- 
cations call them into that section. It is a subject which 
at present does not interest business men." 

William Ferguson, an English traveler, visited the Re- 
doubt in 1856, and said it v^^as "a small brick house with 
arched windows and doorways, now inhabited by the 
'lowest class.' " (21) Only at rare intervals during these 
later years while the Redoubt was used as a dwelling, was 
it occupied by families of the character of those living 
there in its early days. Among these were the parents of 
Professor Michael J. McMahon, the Pittsburgh educator, 
who was for many years Principal of the First Ward Public 
School. The family resided in the Redoubt during the last 
years of the decade beginning in 1850, and in the decade 
beginning in 1860, and it was during this time that Pro- 
fessor McMahon was born there. 

What is now called the Old City Hall, situated on 
Smithfield Street, was dedicated on May 23, 1872. During 
the course of its construction, the stone tablet was removed 
from the Redoubt and placed in the rear wall of the build- 
ing, opposite the main entrance on Smithfield Street, at the 
top of the first flight of stairs, and immediately beneath 
the window containing a representation of the seal of the 
city. After the Redoubt became the property of the 
Daughters of the American Revolution, the stone was 
taken from the City Hall and replaced in its old location 
on the Redoubt. 

The writer recalls visiting the building in his boyhood 
when it was occupied by an Irish family, who besides living 
there had adopted, very likely unconsciously, Mr. Lyford's 
suggestion, and in addition to showing the place to visitors, 
were selling candy, lemonade, cigars, etc. The Redoubt 
was also occasionally used for less legitimate purposes, an 
instance occurring after the passage by the Legislature of 
the Brooks High License Law in 1887, when the building 



78 Fort Pitt 

was used as a "speakeasy," as drinking houses were called 
where liquor was sold illegally. 

Brewery Alley had been abandoned for more than half 
a century, and as the Redoubt was in an obscure location, 
it was difficult of approach. It could be reached either 
from First Street, vacated by the city when the Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad took possession of the block in which the 
Redoubt is located, or by way of Point Alley, also vacated 
at the same time. It was surrounded by poorly constructed, 
shabby brick and frame houses, with a frame stable or 
two close by. Hemming it in on all sides were manufac- 
turing establishments, forges, foundries, boiler works, 
planing mills, lumber yards and machine shops. 

The settlement about the Redoubt was unique in Pitts- 
burgh. The owner of the land lived in England, and leased 
it in small lots for long terms of years to persons who built 
their own dwellings, or released the ground for manu- 
facturing purposes. It was the most densely populated 
district in the city, and according to Rev. Dr. A. A. Lambing, 
who had an intimate knowledge of conditions in that lo- 
cality, being pastor of the Roman Catholic "Church of Our 
Lady of Consolation," (22) located on the east side of First 
Street only a short distance from the Redoubt, who, writing 
in 1880, said: "It would not be exaggeration to say that 
it would not be difficult to find at least a hundred families 
who each occupied a single room, and that perhaps not. 
more than twelve by fourteen feet." The Redoubt was as 
crowded with tenants as the other houses. The people 
were with very few exceptions, Irish Catholics from County 
Galway, who had settled there about twenty-five* years 
earlier, and Gaelic was the language generally spoken, even 
by children born there. The people were poor and earned 
their daily bread and little more. From 1868 on, they had 
a church and a school of their own, the "Church of Our 
Lady of Consolation," located in a remodeled dwelling on 
First Street. And in the church a priest preached sermons 
in Gaelic, and the district had another attraction in addi- 
tion to the Redoubt. (23) 

All this had vanished; the shabby settlement has dis- 
appeared. The Irish are there no longer. The oldest among 
them are long since dead, and their children and grand- 



Fort Pitt 79 

children have scattered over the city and to more distant 
points. The houses, the stables, the manufacturing estab- 
lishments have gone, the very contour of the ground has 
changed and now along Duquesne Way one sees a huge 
brick warehouse extending along the entire length of the 
block; a long low freight house runs parallel with it, and 
leading to the buildings are railroad tracks, some low on 
the ground, others elevated high in the air. Nestling 
among these marvels of modern industrial life, sole re- 
minder of the life that was, there still remains the 
OLD REDOUBT. 

REFERENCES AND NOTE. 
CHAPTER VII. 

1. John F. Watson. Annals of Philadelphia and Pennsylvania, 
Philadelphia, 1857, Vol. II, p. 131. 

2. Pennsylvania Archives, Vol. X, pp. 463-464. 

3. C. W. Butterfield. Washington-Irvine Correspondence, Madi- 
son, Wis., pp. 170-172. 

4. Louise Phelps Kellogg. Frontier Advance on the Zipper Ohio, 
Madison, 1916, p. 175. 

5. Neville B. Craig. In The American Pioneer, Cincinnati, 1844, 
Vol. I, p. 239. 

6. Major Samuel S. Forman. Narrative of a Journey Down the 
Ohio and Mississippi in 1789-90, Cincinnati, 1888, pp. 19-25. 

7. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1851, 
p. 92. 

Neville B. Craig. In The American Pioneer, Supra. 
Harris's General Business Directory, Pittsburgh, 1841, p. 5. 

8. Historical Account of Bouquet's Expedition, Cincinnati, 1868, 
p. 33. 

9. Ibid, p. 81. 

10. Isaac Craig. In The American Pioneer, Supra, p. 237. 

11. George H. Thurston. Allegheny County's Hu7idred Years, Pitts- 
burgh, 1888, p. 15. 

12. Olden Time. Pittsburgh, 1846, Vol. I, p. 40. 

13. James Ross. Colonel George Wood's Plan of Pittsburgh, P. 
B. Recorder's Office of Allegheny County. 

14. The Navigator, Pittsburgh, 1808, p. 33. 

15. John F. Watson, Supra. 

15a. Note. — William Masson, who prepared this plan, was appar- 
ently the sailmaker who in the early part of the Nineteenth 
Century resided on Water Street, between Smithfield Street and 
Cherry Alley. The Pittsburgh Directories for both 1815 and 
1819 have him as residing at this place, and according to a 
deed filed in the Recorder's Office of Allegheny County he had 
purchased the property in 1813. The belief that he was the 
author of the plan is strengthened by the fact that the plan 
contains pictures of eleven sailing ships of various classes, all 
of which are labeled as having been built at Pittsburgh or in 
the vicinity, and about which hardly anyone could have had knowl- 
edge, unless he was intimately connected with shipbuilding. 



80 Fort Pitt 

16. C. W. Butterfield. Supra, p. 78. 

17. Neville B. Craig. The History of Pittsburgh, Supra, p. 187. 

18. Henry R. Schoolcraft, LL. D. Information Respecting the 
History, Condition and Prospects of the Indian Tribes of the 
United States, Philadelphia, 1853, Part III, p. 336. 

19. Georges Henri Victor Collot. Voyage Dans L'Amerique Sep- 
tenroale ou Description, Etc., Paris, 1826, Vol. I, p. 61. 

20. W. G. Lyford. InThe Western Address Directory for 1837, 
Baltimore, 1837, pp. 45-47. 

21. William Ferguson, LL.D. America, by River and Rail, London, 
MDCCCLVI, pp. 246-247. 

22. Rev. A. A. Lambing. A History of the Catholic Church in the 
Dioceses of Pittsburgh and Allegheny, New York, 1880, pp. 137- 
138. 

23. Rev A. A. Lambing. Mary's First Shrine in the Wilderness, 
Pittsburgh, 1888, pp. 13-14. 


















f^'C^W: ^0^ :i 



^^ 






.^ 








Av ... V *-° 



,0 



?>■ <^, Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 

-^z Neutralizing Agent: Magnesium Oxide 

^^ Treatment Date: 











PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGIES, L.P. 
111 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 





aV ,< 






b V^ n'.-^^^-. -^^Q^ 




•^, 



.-^c 



v^ 







i9^^ 












■•^<.„ .^-^^ • 











^i-^c. \wmw: .v^^^ -.«ii^r .^"-^^ 






o-^o. 







